Successes

Our record of success stems from our knowledge that a complete defence requires that we advocate for our clients both in and out of the courtroom.  Advocating proactively has resulted in many of our clients having their charges withdrawn soon after they were laid.  We are happy to highlight a few of the recent successes obtained for our clients over the past decade.  

Resolutions

• Ontario College of Pharmacists v. V.V. (Professional Misconduct / Incompetence)(Discipline Committee)
• V.V. faced five counts of professional misconduct.  Over several months, Mr. Norton negotiated a settlement with Counsel for the College in which V.V. accepted some responsibility to resolve the matter in her favour.
• R. v. A.A. (Impaired Operation and Operation over .80)
• A.A. was charged with drinking and driving offences following a serious car collision.  A.A.'s charges were withdrawn after Mr. Norton highlighted the various problems the Crown had with its case.  A.A. accepted responsibility for careless driving (a provincial offence) which did not result in a criminal conviction or criminal record.
• R. v. S.H.(Fraud Over x10 ($420,000.00), Breach of Trust)
• After a 20 month police investigation, S.H. was charged with fraud in the amount of $420,000 and breach of trust as owner and executive director of a non-profit organization.  Mr. Norton negotiated a resolution that resulted in S.H. only receiving a conditional sentence (6 months house arrest).  The Crown withdrew all but one count of fraud. CTV News Video
• R. v. R.P. (Conspiracy to Commit an Indictable Offence)
• R.P. was charged with orchestrating and participating in the theft of over $1,000,000.00 worth of computer equipment.  R.P.'s charges were withdrawn prior to a trial date being set after Mr. Norton convinced the Crown that it had no prospect of conviction.
• R. v. B.O. (Domestic Assault x2)
• Prior to trial, Mr. Norton presented evidence to the Crown regarding the complainant's motives and admissions to others that she (B.O.'s ex-wife) had made up the allegations to get the upper hand in an on-going family law proceeding.  The Crown reviewed the evidence and withdrew all charges against B.O.
• R. v. A.F. (Assault with a Weapon, Assault Cause Bodily Harm, Robbery, Extortion, Utter Threat to Cause Death, Forcible Confinement)
• A.F. was charged with numerous violent offences alleging that he was attempting to collect a large debt.  Following the cross-examination of the complainant on the very first day of the preliminary inquiry, the Crown conceded that it no longer had a prospect of conviction and withdrew all charges against A.F.

Trials

• R. v. G.W. (Possession of cocaine for the purpose of trafficking, possession of proceeds of crime and property obtained by crime)
• At mid-trial, following Mr. Norton's cross-examination of the arresting officers, the Crown conceded that it no longer had a prospect of conviction. The trial judge acquitted G.W. of all charges and ordered that the police return all money seized from G.W. during his arrest. 
• R. v. T.A. (Breach of Probation)
• T.A. former spouse alleged that he had breached a condition of his probation order.  Mr. Norton spent countless hours preparing T.A. to testify.  Following Mr. Norton's cross-examination of the complainant and T.A.'s testimony, T.A. was acquitted.
• R. v. D.P. (Domestic Assault (x2), Mischief)
• At mid-trial, following Mr. Norton's cross-examination of the complainant, the Crown conceded that it no longer had a prospect of conviction and directed the trial judge to dismiss one count of assault and the single count of mischief.  Following Mr. Norton's closing argument, the trial judge acquitted D.P. on the remaining count of assault.
• R. v. W.K. (Sexual Assault, Sexual Interference, Sexual Exploitation)
• W.K. was charged with various historical sexual offences from the 1990s.  Following a four week trial, the jury acquitted W.K. of all charges.  Following W.K.'s acquittal in this high profile case, Justice Lois Roberts (now a Justice at the Court of Appeal for Ontario) credited Mr. Norton for his "excellent advocacy" and stated that he was a "credit to...[his] profession."  Read more.
• R. v. K.S. (Second Degree Murder)
• In a high profile case, K.S. was prosecuted three consecutive times for second degree murder.  Mr. Norton and co-counsel, Joseph Wilkinson, conducted separate, back-to-back jury trials over a seven month period.  The jury acquitted K.S. at his third trial after deliberating for five days.
• R. v. N.W. (Drinking and Driving Offence - Refuse Breath Sample)  
• N.W. was charged with refusing to provide a breath sample after the police stopped his vehicle and made a road-side screening demand.  The judge acquitted N.W. after Mr. Norton established in cross-examination that the police had no grounds to make a breath demand.

Appeals

• R. v. M.L. (Impaired operation of a motor vehicle) (Superior Court of Justice)
• In this case, Mr. Norton acted as both trial and appellate Counsel.  M.L. was charged with impaired operation of a motor vehicle and driving with a blood alcohol level over .80 mg.  M.L. was arrested late in the evening following a single car accident.  At trial, following Mr. Norton's cross-examination of the arresting officer, the Crown was forced to concede that the officer had breached several Charter rights of M.L.  The Court acquitted M.L. of this charge.  M.L. was unfortunately still convicted of impaired driving.  However, Mr. Norton successfully appealed the impaired driving conviction.   
• R. v. F. G. (Theft under $5,000 and Possession of Property Obtained by Crime) (Court of Appeal for Ontario) Reported Case
• F.G. was convicted at trial based on DNA evidence found on a balaclava located inside a stolen car. DNA evidence established that there were three profiles on the balaclava, including F.G.'s profile. Mr. Norton successfully argued that the verdict was unreasonable. Reported Case
• R. v. P.N. (Indecent Act) (Superior Court of Justice)
• P.N. was convicted of indecent act at trial and retained Mr. Norton to conduct his appeal.  On appeal, the Court ordered a new trial.  It agreed with Mr. Norton that the trial judge had erred in law.  P.N. retained Mr. Norton to conduct the re-trial.  Mr. Norton met the head Crown Attorney and convinced her that the Crown had no reasonable prospect of conviction based on Mr. Norton's success on the appeal.  The Crown stayed all charges against P.N.
• R. v. L.E. (Aggravated Assault with a Weapon) (Court of Appeal for Ontario) Reported Case
• L.E. was convicted at trial of aggravated assault with a weapon following a “road rage” incident.  L.E. retained Mr. Norton to conduct his appeal.  Mr. Norton filed fresh evidence and successfully argued that L.E.’s trial counsel (not Mr. Norton) had provided ineffective assistance to L.E.  The Court of Appeal ordered a new trial.  Before a new trial could be set, Mr. Norton convinced the head Crown Attorney to stay all charges.  This case represents shift in the law recognizing that there are circumstances where the presumption of trial counsel’s competence is substantially diminished. Read more.
• R. v. R.P. (Assault x8) (Court of Appeal for Ontario) Reported Case
• R.P. was convicted at trial of several counts of assault.  R.P. retained Mr. Norton to conduct his appeal.  Mr. Norton filed fresh evidence on the appeal and was successful in having R.P.’s sentence significantly reduced.