Facing a Fraud Over $5,000 Charge in Toronto? What You Need to Know and Why Hiring Daniel Brown Law Could Save Your Future
One moment you’re a professional managing clients, finances or corporate matters — the next you’re staring down an accusation for fraud over $5,000. In Toronto, Ontario, this allegation is serious, life-changing and must be handled by expert criminal defence. At Daniel Brown Law LLP, we defend complex fraud cases and protect your future. For many professionals in Toronto, the shock and consequences of a fraud charge are devastatingly real. When facing an allegation this serious, securing the immediate help of a skilled Toronto Criminal Lawyer for fraud defence is non-negotiable. The legal process that follows is complex, and the stakes are incredibly high.
Understanding a Fraud Over $5,000 Charge in Ontario
Under section 380(1)(a) of the Criminal Code of Canada, an accused may be charged with an indictable offence for fraud where the alleged loss or value exceeds $5,000. Conviction can result in up to 14 years in prison. On high-value schemes exceeding $1 million, a mandatory minimum of 2 years may apply. Daniel Brown Law’s fraud defence page explains the threshold and penalties in depth.
This isn’t just a “white-collar” label — it’s a charge that carries the same hard consequences as serious violent offences in terms of records, employment risk, licensing impact and travel restrictions.
The Immediate Consequences: Bail Conditions
Even before a trial determines guilt or innocence, an accused person’s life is significantly restricted by bail conditions. While a person with no criminal record may be released directly from the police station on an Undertaking, others will face a formal Bail Hearing in Toronto. This process is where the severity of the imposed restrictions is determined. Bail conditions can immediately curtail your freedom of movement. You may be required to surrender your passport and be prohibited from travelling outside the jurisdiction. Bail terms can also directly interfere with your ability to perform your job if you work in fields like accounting or finance.
The Long-Term Stakes: If Convicted
If the Crown secures a conviction for Fraud over $5000, the penalties are severe and can have lifelong ramifications.
Maximum Penalty: Fraud Over $5,000 is an indictable offence. Under section 380(1)(a) of the Criminal Code, the maximum penalty is a 14-year term of imprisonment.
Mandatory Minimums: For large-scale frauds exceeding one million dollars, section 380(1.1) of the Criminal Code imposes a mandatory minimum sentence of two years in prison.
Criminal Record: A conviction results in a permanent criminal record. This severely impacts your ability to travel (especially to the United States), your immigration status, and your future employment prospects in any field that requires a Criminal Record Check in Toronto.
Restitution Order: The court can impose a Restitution Order. Under section 738(1)(a) of the Criminal Code, this order compels you to repay the full amount of the loss and is enforceable like a civil judgment.
Why Early Legal Engagement Matters
The first 24–48 hours after an investigation begins are critical. At Daniel Brown Law, we move fast to:
Secure your rights — including Charter protections under sections 8 (search & seizure) and 11(b) (unreasonable delay).
Preserve crucial evidence — financial records, emails, electronic data can vanish or be misrepresented.
Work behind the scenes to possibly prevent formal charges through negotiation with police or the Crown.
Our firm emphasises proactive defence rather than waiting for the inevitable courtroom fight.
Crafting a Fraud Defence Strategy Toronto
An arrest is the beginning of the legal process, not the end. A skilled defence lawyer has several powerful avenues to challenge the prosecution’s case, protect your rights, and secure your future.
Strategy 1: Challenging the Investigation and Procedure
Charter Violations: Searches of electronic devices conducted without a proper search warrant can violate your rights against unreasonable search and seizure under section 8 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Evidence obtained unlawfully can be excluded from trial.
Unreasonable Delay: Your right to be tried within a reasonable time is protected by section 11(b) of the Charter. Excessive delay due to Crown or police inaction can lead to a judge “staying” the charges.
Improper Disclosure: The Crown has a constitutional obligation to provide the defence with all relevant information. Failing to provide disclosure in a meaningful, searchable format, as required by cases like R v Dunn, can violate an accused person’s right to make a full answer and defence.
Strategy 2: Attacking the Crown’s Evidence
The Crown’s case often hinges on its ability to properly introduce financial records and documents into evidence.
Inadmissible Bank Records: Under section 29 of the Canada Evidence Act, copies of bank records are inadmissible unless accompanied by a specific affidavit from a bank employee swearing the records were made in the “usual and ordinary course of business”. Without this technical requirement being met, crucial records may be excluded.
Inadmissible Business Documents: Section 30 of the Canada Evidence Act sets out similar strict requirements for admitting other business records. A detail-oriented defence lawyer will scrutinize every document to ensure the Crown has followed these technical rules precisely.
Strategy 3: Contesting the Core Allegation — Proving “No Intent”
The most powerful defence strategy involves challenging the most critical element: the mens rea, or the guilty mind. The Crown must prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, that you had subjective knowledge of the dishonesty and an intent to cause deprivation.
Distinguishing Fraud from Business Failure: Canadian law differentiates criminal fraud from “mere negligent misrepresentation” or sloppy business practices. Scrambling to save a crumbling business does not automatically equal criminal fraud.
Absence of the “Badges of Fraud”: Courts look for certain signs of dishonest intent, such as concealment or the “diversion of monies for personal use”. If your actions were transparent and not hidden, it creates a powerful argument against any intent to deceive.
Reliance on Established Rules and Authority: Following established administrative rules and acting on direct instructions from a person in authority can form a powerful defence by negating dishonest intent.
How Our Team Defends Fraud Allegations
1. Examining the Investigation Process
Complex fraud investigations often involve search warrants, seizures of business records, forensic accounting and interviews under caution. Our team challenges improper warrants, over-broad authorizations, and delays that infringe the Charter. For example, if police entered a business without proper justification or executed a search after the warrant expired — we may have grounds to exclude evidence.
2. Probing the Crown’s Evidence
The Crown’s case typically hinges on a “paper trail” — bank records, invoices, ledgers, spreadsheets, internal communications. But these documents can have flaws — authentication issues, missing links, chain-of-custody problems. We scrutinize every page, confront the assumptions underlying the “loss” calculation and may call forensic accountants or digital-forensic experts.
3. Demonstrating Lack of Intent to Defraud
A key defence in fraud matters is showing the absence of mens rea — that is, you did not intentionally deceive or cause a loss. Often what looks like misconduct is actually poor bookkeeping, business failure, misunderstanding of authority, or legitimate reliance on others. We dig deep to build credible arguments: perhaps you acted under board-direction, you believed you had authority to use funds, or you were misled by others.
Where suitable, we explore alternatives to indictment such as restitution-driven negotiations, client cooperation, or a robust case for withdrawal based on Crown discretion.
Why Choose the Award-Winning Lawyers at Daniel Brown Law?
A charge of Fraud Over $5,000 is a life-changing event that threatens to destroy your reputation, livelihood, and future. For professionals in Toronto facing these complex allegations, the choice of legal counsel is the single most important decision you will make.
The award-winning lawyers at Daniel Brown Law specialize in defending these exact types of high-stakes, documentation-heavy cases.
Proven Track Record: Daniel Brown Law has extensive experience defending both minor and large-scale fraud cases, achieving numerous acquittals by identifying significant problems with the documentation and evidence underlying the prosecution. We have a record of success in complex cases, including securing bail for a client with a fraud conviction pending appeal.
National Reputation: Our firm has been repeatedly cited as one of Canada’s Top Criminal Law Boutiques by Canadian Lawyer Magazine and consistently recognized by Best Lawyers in Canada for excellence in Criminal Defence. Our strong reputation with prosecutors and judges helps us achieve winning results at every stage.
Specialist Expertise: Fraud prosecutions are “grounded in documentation”. Our team has the skill and creativity to spot opportunities to exclude or challenge the Crown’s complex paper trail, taking full advantage of any possible weaknesses in the prosecutor’s case. We handle all stages, from pre-charge advocacy to prevent charges from being filed, through to complex criminal appeals.
Client-Centric Defence: Our clients are often professionals, first responders, and individuals who are strangers to the justice system. We are experts in crisis management, offering advice to help clients handle media attention and public scrutiny, ensuring that our greatest successes are the clients who stay out of the headlines.
When your freedom and professional life are on the line, you need the strategic, knowledgeable defence that Daniel Brown Law provides.
FAQs: Frequently Asked Questions About Fraud Over $5,000 in Toronto
What is Fraud Over $5,000?
“Fraud over $5,000” refers to an offence under section 380(1)(a) of the Criminal Code where the value or alleged loss exceeds $5,000. It is an indictable offence and carries very serious penalties including up to 14 years’ imprisonment.
Can I avoid jail time for fraud in Toronto?
Yes — depending on the facts, first-time offenders, or where the evidence is weak, our team has negotiated alternatives such as withdrawal of charges, non-custodial sentences or community based dispositions. But you must act quickly and engage experienced counsel from the outset.
Will I lose my job or licensing if I’m charged with fraud?
Possibly. A fraud charge is a crime of dishonesty and can trigger professional-licence consequences, employment termination, or regulatory hearings. Our lawyers assist in both the criminal matter and the parallel employment/regulatory risk strategy to protect your career while the criminal process unfolds.
Can fraud charges be dropped before trial?
Yes. We will challenge whether the Crown has sufficient evidence, whether there were Charter-rights breaches, whether alternative explanations exist (e.g., business error rather than deceit). If successful, this may lead the Crown to withdraw or reduce charges.
Does paying back the money guarantee a withdrawal of charges?
No. Restitution (paying back the alleged loss) is helpful and sometimes favorable in plea discussions, but it does not automatically guarantee the Crown will drop the case. The best approach is to consult us first before making any offers or admissions.
Can I travel or renew my passport while charged with fraud?
Possibly yes, but bail conditions often restrict travel. Our lawyers routinely negotiate bail variations so clients can maintain essential work or family travel while the criminal process proceeds.
Is a fraud over $5,000 charge always an indictable offence?
Yes, in Canada, Fraud Over $5,000 is classified as an indictable offence, which is the most serious category under the Criminal Code. This allows for the maximum penalty of 14 years imprisonment.
Can I avoid a criminal record for a fraud charge?
While the Crown seeks conviction, a skilled Toronto Criminal Lawyer for fraud can work towards outcomes that avoid a criminal record. In some instances, an offer to pay back the money (restitution) may result in the Crown withdrawing the charges.
What is the most critical defence to a fraud charge?
The most powerful defence often involves contesting the mens rea, or the guilty mind. The defence must create reasonable doubt that you had a subjective intent to cause dishonesty or deprivation, distinguishing your actions from mere bad business judgment.
Will a Restitution Order cover the civil claim?
A judge can impose a Restitution Order. While this is enforceable like a civil judgment, the Crown’s order does not necessarily prevent the victim from pursuing a separate civil lawsuit.
Next Steps: Protect Your Future Today
If you or someone you know is under investigation for fraud over $5,000, or has been charged, every hour counts. Do not speak to investigators before retaining a lawyer. Let us preserve your rights, your career, and your freedom. The single most critical step is to secure expert legal advice immediately.
Contact Daniel Brown Law at (416) 297-7200 for a confidential consultation in Toronto. Our award-winning team stands ready to protect you.
Being accused of sexual assault is a seismic event. The moment you become aware of a police investigation or face an arrest, your world is turned upside down. The shock, fear, and profound uncertainty can be paralyzing. In this moment, instinct can lead to devastating mistakes. The initial hours and days following an accusation are often the most critical, and the actions you take—or fail to take—can fundamentally shape the entire trajectory of your defence.
This article is not a substitute for direct legal advice from a qualified lawyer about your specific situation. Instead, consider it an urgent briefing from a defence counsel’s perspective, a strategic guide to navigating the immediate aftermath of a sexual assault allegation including seven critical steps you need to take immediately to help defend against this serious allegation. Understanding these steps is your first line of defence in a system that is complex, demanding, and unforgiving.
Your freedom, your reputation, and your future are on the line. The choices you make right now matter more than you can possibly imagine. Let’s ensure they are the right ones. At Daniel Brown Law, our award-winning Toronto criminal defence lawyers are recognized nationally for trial and appellate excellence. Daniel Brown is certified by the Law Society of Ontario as a Specialist in Criminal Law. Clients trust us to act immediately, protect their liberty at bail, and build strategic, evidence-driven defences in high-stakes sexual offence prosecutions.
1) Exercise Your Right to Silence—Completely and Without Exception
The first, most important, and non-negotiable step is to exercise your right to remain silent. When confronted by police, you are obligated to provide your name and date of birth. Beyond that, you must say absolutely nothing about the allegations. This is not just a right; it is the single most powerful tool you have to protect yourself at the outset of a criminal case.
Debunking the “Innocence” Myth
Many people, especially those who believe they are innocent, feel an overwhelming urge to explain their side of the story. The thinking is logical but legally perilous: “If I just tell them the truth, this will all be cleared up.” This is a dangerous myth. Even if you are entirely innocent, speaking to the police is one of the most significant mistakes you can make.
Even if you believe you are innocent and feel that you have nothing to hide, your current situation is likely nerve-wracking and stressful, and you could accidentally misstate the truth in a way that hurts you later at trial. Under the immense stress of an interrogation, your memory can falter. You might get a date wrong, misremember a sequence of events, or omit a detail that seems unimportant at the time. Later, when the Crown prosecutor compares your statement to other evidence, these innocent mistakes can be portrayed as deliberate lies, severely damaging your credibility in front of a judge or jury.
The Dangers of Speaking Are Real and Severe
Any communication with the police is fraught with risk. It’s crucial to understand that “a statement” is not just a formal, recorded interview. It includes any communication between you and the police while you are in custody, even casual small talk. Officers are trained to build rapport and engage in informal conversation to elicit information. Every word you say can and will be documented and potentially used against you.
Here’s how even seemingly helpful statements can backfire:
Exculpatory Statements Can’t Help, But They Can Hurt: If you give a statement denying the allegation (an exculpatory statement), your defence lawyer cannot normally introduce it at trial as evidence of your innocence. However, the Crown prosecutor can use it against you. If you later testify and your account differs in any way from what you told the police, the Crown can use the initial statement to impeach your credibility. If your statement contains details that can be proven false, even on a minor point, the Crown will argue it demonstrates an effort to mislead the police which is consistent with your guilt.
You Give the Crown a Strategic Roadmap: A defendant in a criminal case isn’t required to share their version of events with the police or prosecutor ahead of a trial. When you provide your version of events or reveal a potential defence, you are handing the Crown attorney a strategic advantage. You are showing them your playbook before the game has even begun. This allows them to prepare their case specifically to dismantle your defence, find witnesses to contradict your account, and tailor their trial strategy accordingly.
The best way to exercise your right to silence is to be completely silent. While some lawyers advise clients to repeatedly say, “On the advice of counsel, I wish to remain silent,” complete silence is generally more effective at ending the questioning. It is awkward and unnatural, but it is your most powerful shield.
Action: Politely state that you wish to speak to a lawyer and will not answer questions. Then call us: (416) 297-7200.
2) Preserve, Don’t Purge—Your Digital Life Is Critical Evidence
In the emotional turmoil following a sexual assault accusation, a common and understandable instinct is to erase all digital traces of the complainant. Anger, hurt, or a desire to simply move on can lead to the deletion of text messages, call logs, emails, and social media conversations. This is a critical error.
Your digital life is not just a record of your past; it is a vital source of potential evidence for your defence. This is why one of the first things a specialized criminal lawyer will do is obtain copies of all these communications from you, ensuring they are preserved in a forensically sound manner for trial.
What to Preserve
Voicemails
Text messages (SMS, iMessage, WhatsApp, etc.)
Emails
Call records from your phone provider
Social media conversations (Facebook Messenger, Instagram DMs, Snapchat, etc.) between you and the complainant
Any relevant social media posts or communications between the complainant and other people that you may have access to or knowledge of.
Why Preservation is Paramount
This digital evidence can be the key to raising a reasonable doubt. These records provide context that is often missing from the complainant’s initial statement to police. They can demonstrate the nature and tone of your relationship, show a pattern of consensual communication, or contain statements from the complainant that directly contradict the allegations. Erasing this information is akin to destroying evidence that could prove your innocence.
While it is sometimes possible for a forensic expert to recover deleted data from an electronic device, it is not a guarantee. Some or all of the evidence may be permanently lost once deleted. The safest, most effective strategy is to preserve everything from the outset. Early intervention by a lawyer is crucial here, as they will know exactly what is needed and how to ensure it is properly saved in a format that will be admissible in court.
Furthermore, valuable information can often be found in the public domain. A simple Internet search of a witness’s name can uncover public profiles on platforms like Facebook, X, and Instagram. Since these platforms are often linked, an open profile on one can lead to discoverable content on another, all of which can be used as evidence at trial.
Do not delete texts, emails, DMs, photos, or call logs. These materials often provide context about the relationship, timelines, tone, and consent discussions.
Action: Stop posting about the case. Back up devices. Forward materials to your lawyer through secure channels.
3) Hire a Specialist Criminal Defence Lawyer—Immediately
The term “certified specialist in criminal law” is not just a marketing buzzword. This designation is earned through years of focused experience, rigorous peer review, and a demonstrated expertise in criminal law.
Defending a sexual assault allegation requires navigating a vast and technical body of law covering dozens of distinct and complex topics, including:
The precise mental element (mens rea) for various sexual offences
Complex rules governing search and seizure of evidence
Applications for publication bans
Special protections for witnesses
Highly technical evidentiary rules for private records and prior sexual history
Many criminal law practitioners lack the depth of knowledge required to effectively use these intricate rules to your advantage. A criminal law specialist lives and breathes this area of law. They understand the nuances of the legislation, the latest Supreme Court rulings, and the strategies that are most effective in court. In the face of a sexual assault charge, a specialist lawyer is not a luxury; it is a necessity.
Action: Speak to our experienced sexual assault defence team now. Explore our Sexual Assault Defence page and our Appeals work for complex cases.
4) Understand That “Consent” Has a Strict Legal Definition
In the vast majority of sexual assault cases, the central issue is consent. However, the legal definition of consent in Canada is often vastly different from a layperson’s everyday understanding of the term. The entire case can hinge on whether the Crown can prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, the absence of consent to the sexual activity as the law defines it.
Under Canadian law, consent is the voluntary agreement of the complainant to engage in the specific sexual activity in question. This definition is governed by several strict legal principles that you must understand.
Key Legal Principles of Consent
Consent is Subjective: The court must determine what was in the complainant’s mind at the time the sexual activity occurred. It is their subjective, internal state of mind that matters. This means the court is not concerned with what a reasonable person might have inferred from the situation, or what the accused believed was happening. The only thing that legally matters is what was actually going on in the complainant’s mind at that specific moment. What an accused person believed or assumed is a separate issue (covered below).
There is No Implied Consent: This is one of the most critical principles. In Canadian law, consent cannot be implied from a person’s silence, passivity, or ambiguous conduct. The absence of a “no” does not mean “yes.” Consent must be active and affirmative.
Incapacity Invalidates Consent: A person cannot legally consent if they are unconscious or so intoxicated that they lack the capacity to understand and voluntarily agree to the activity. Furthermore, if a person gives consent while sober but later becomes incapable due to intoxication or falling unconscious, that prior consent ends. Any sexual activity that occurs after the point of incapacity is a sexual assault.
The “Reasonable Steps” Defence Has a High Bar: If an accused person claims they had an honest but mistaken belief that the complainant was consenting, it is not enough for that belief to be genuine. The law requires that the accused must have taken reasonable steps to ascertain that the complainant was consenting. This places a clear onus on the person initiating sexual activity to ensure, through words or unambiguous affirmative conduct, that the other person is a willing and continuous participant. Relying on assumptions or misinterpreting ambiguous signals is not a defence.
5) Build a Defence with Evidence—Not Just Your Word
Many people mistakenly believe that sexual assault cases are simple “he-said/she-said” scenarios where a judge or jury just decides who they believe more. While credibility is always a central issue, a sophisticated and robust defence goes far beyond a simple denial. It involves proactively using advanced legal tools to gather and present evidence that challenges the Crown’s case and creates a reasonable doubt.
This is another area where a specialist lawyer’s expertise is indispensable. They know how to employ complex legal procedures to uncover evidence that can be vital to your defence.
Advanced Legal Tools for Your Defence
Accessing Third-Party and Private Records: A complainant’s private records—such as diaries, counselling notes, or social media messages with others—can sometimes contain information that is crucial for the defence. However, accessing these records is extremely difficult due to strong privacy protections. A defence lawyer must bring a formal court application (known as a Millsapplication or an application under s. 278.92 of the Criminal Code) to gain access. This is a complex, multi-stage process with strict legal tests that a judge must apply. Success requires a deep understanding of the law and persuasive legal argument.
Challenging the Complainant’s Narrative with Other Evidence: The law places severe restrictions on introducing evidence of a complainant’s other sexual activity. These rules, found in section 276 of the Criminal Code, exist to prevent the defence from relying on the “twin myths”: the outdated and prohibited ideas that a person’s sexual history makes them more likely to have consented or less worthy of belief. However, in very specific and legally defined circumstances, a lawyer can apply to introduce this type of evidence if it is directly relevant to a legitimate issue at trial (for example, to provide an alternative explanation for the presence of physical evidence like DNA, rather than to attack the complainant’s character). This is one of the most technically complex applications in criminal law.
Using Expert Evidence: A skilled defence lawyer may retain an expert witness to provide an alternative context for the evidence. For example, a toxicologist could testify about the effects of alcohol on memory and behaviour, challenging assumptions about a complainant’s level of impairment. A psychologist might be called to provide evidence on issues like false memory syndrome, especially in cases where a complainant’s memories have emerged or changed over time, potentially influenced by therapy or suggestion. This expert evidence can be critical in educating the court and challenging the Crown’s theory of the case.
6) Prepare for a Complex, Lengthy Process
Defending a sexual assault charge is a marathon, not a sprint. The criminal justice process is notoriously slow, demanding, and emotionally draining. It is crucial to set realistic expectations from the very beginning to prepare yourself for the long road ahead.
The journey from accusation to verdict involves numerous distinct stages, each with its own procedures and strategic considerations. A typical case can involve:
The initial arrest and bail hearing.
A lengthy disclosure process, where your lawyer receives and meticulously analyzes the evidence from the Crown.
A preliminary inquiry, a hearing to test if there is enough evidence to proceed to trial, is now only available in a small number of cases. Following major amendments to the Criminal Code in 2019, eligibility for this crucial procedural step has become a legal minefield. Determining whether a case even qualifies for a preliminary inquiry requires a specialist’s knowledge of retrospective law application, a subject so complex that the Ontario and Quebec Courts of Appeal have issued conflicting rulings on the matter. This creates a situation where your rights could differ depending on judicial interpretation—a perfect example of the intricate legal maze you face, and a powerful demonstration of why a specialist’s guidance is non-negotiable.
Numerous pre-trial motions, where your lawyer may argue to exclude evidence or bring one of the complex applications mentioned above.
Finally, the trial itself, which can last for days or even weeks.
The sheer scope of this legal field is staggering. A successful sexual assault defence requires navigating a vast and highly technical body of law. Patience, resilience, and expert guidance are essential to withstand the pressures of this long and complex process.
7) Know That “Credibility” ≠ “Reliability”
When a judge or jury assesses a witness, they are not just making a gut decision about whether they “seem believable.” The law has a structured and nuanced approach to evaluating testimony, and a skilled defence lawyer’s job is to ensure the court applies these principles correctly, free from common misconceptions.
Credibility vs. Reliability
First, it is vital to distinguish between credibility and reliability.
Credibility refers to a witness’s honesty and their desire to tell the truth. Reliability refers to the accuracy of their evidence.
A witness can be perfectly credible—meaning they are honestly trying to tell the truth as they remember it—but still be unreliable because their memory of the event is mistaken or inaccurate. A strong defence often focuses on challenging the reliability of the evidence, pointing out inconsistencies or objective facts that suggest the complainant’s memory is flawed, without necessarily accusing them of lying.
Challenging Myths and Stereotypes
Canadian courts are legally required to avoid relying on outdated myths and stereotypes about how a “real” sexual assault victim should behave. An experienced defence lawyer knows these myths are legally impermissible and will object to any reasoning—from the Crown or in a judge’s analysis—that relies on them. Common myths include:
The myth that a true victim will always fight back.
The myth that a delay in reporting an assault means the allegation is likely false.
The myth that a victim will always avoid their abuser after an assault.
The law, informed by decades of research on trauma, recognizes that there is no single ‘correct’ way for a person to react to a sexual assault. Behaviours that may seem counter-intuitive to a layperson—such as not fighting back, delaying a report, or even maintaining contact with an abuser—are now understood by the courts as common and varied human responses to trauma. The role of a defence lawyer is to educate the court and build a case that is assessed on facts and evidence, not on outdated and prejudicial assumptions.
Finally, it’s important to manage expectations about certain types of evidence. For instance, while an accused person can introduce evidence of their good character (e.g., a reputation for honesty), courts have held this evidence has diminished value in sexual assault cases that occur in private. This is because a person’s public reputation may have no bearing on their private conduct. This is just one example of the nuanced legal knowledge a specialist lawyer brings to your defence.
Why Hire Daniel Brown Law LLP for a Sexual Assault Defence
Deep specialization in sexual offence trials and appeals.
Award‑winning reputation in criminal defence and appellate advocacy.
Proven results at every stage of a case, from bail to trial.
Appellate strength: our appeals practice is widely recognized.
Facing a sexual assault allegation is one of the most daunting experiences a person can endure. The legal, personal, and financial stakes are immense. However, it is essential to remember that in the Canadian legal system, an accusation is not a conviction. The presumption of innocence is the bedrock of our justice system, and the Crown bears the heavy burden of proving guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. The key to ensuring a fair trial and mounting a robust defence lies in making informed, strategic decisions from the very first moment.
The seven steps outlined above—exercising your right to silence, preserving evidence, hiring a specialist, and understanding the core legal concepts—are your immediate priorities. The complexity of the law, the high stakes involved, and the severe emotional toll make expert legal guidance truly indispensable. Navigating this process alone, or with inexperienced counsel, is a risk that can have irreversible consequences.
With your freedom and reputation on the line, can you afford to navigate this intricate legal maze on your own?
Do not speak to police before you speak to us. Contact our team for immediate, confidential advice. The decisions you make right now—silence, preservation, retaining a specialist, and evidence‑driven strategy—can protect your future. If you are facing a sexual assault allegation, speak with our team now.
Phone: (416) 297-7200 Office: Daniel Brown Law, 400–103 Church St., Toronto, ON M5C 2G3
❓ Sexual Assault Charges in Ontario — Frequently Asked Questions
Should I speak to police if I’m innocent?
No. Other than giving your name and date of birth, you should remain silent until you have legal advice. Even innocent mistakes can later be used to challenge your credibility.
What evidence should I preserve after an accusation?
Save voicemails, text messages, emails, call logs, and social media messages with the complainant. Do not delete anything; early preservation can be vital to your defence.
What is the legal definition of consent in Canada?
Consent is the complainant’s voluntary agreement to the sexual activity. There is no implied consent; silence or passivity is not consent. Incapacity due to unconsciousness or significant intoxication negates consent.
Can I contact the complainant?
No. Contact is usually prohibited by bail conditions and may harm your case. Speak to your lawyer immediately about any communication concerns.
How long do sexual assault cases take in Ontario?
Timelines vary, but expect months to more than a year, including disclosure, pre‑trial motions, and trial. A specialist lawyer can help move the case efficiently while protecting your rights.
Do I need a specialist sexual assault lawyer?
Yes. Sexual offence law is technically complex. A specialist understands consent law, evidentiary restrictions, Charter applications, and strategic use of expert evidence.
What are possible outcomes?
Outcomes can include withdrawal or stay of charges, acquittal after trial, or—depending on the case—resolution on agreed terms. Your lawyer will advise on the best strategy.
Explore firm updates and case insights on our Legal Commentary hub.
🚨 Charged with Drug Trafficking in Toronto? Your Expert Defence Starts with Daniel Brown Law
Being charged with drug trafficking in Toronto is one of the most frightening and life-altering experiences a person can face. In an instant, your reputation, freedom, and future are at risk. It’s easy to feel powerless — but you are not without options. Small mistakes in police conduct, search warrants, or surveillance can lead to major breakthroughs in your defence. The reality is that the strength of a drug prosecution often depends less on the drugs themselves and more on how the police obtained them.
At Daniel Brown Law, our Toronto criminal defence lawyers have earned a national reputation for uncovering unlawful police actions and winning complex drug prosecutions. Named one of Canada’s Top Criminal Law Boutiques by Canadian Lawyer Magazine and consistently recognized by Best Lawyers in Canada, we are trusted across Ontario to handle the most serious drug offences — including trafficking, importation, and possession for the purpose of trafficking.
“What do you call a drug case without a Charter argument? A conviction.”
— Common saying among Canada’s top criminal defence lawyers
Before making any decisions, it’s crucial to understand the legal landscape — and the defences available to you. Below are five essential truths about defending drug trafficking charges in Ontario.
⚖️ Challenging the Police Investigation: The Foundation of a Successful Defence
Every drug trafficking defence begins with one critical question: Did the police follow the law?
In Canada, police must comply with the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms when conducting surveillance, searches, and arrests. Drug investigations — especially those involving wiretaps, search warrants, and undercover operations — often create opportunities for Charter challenges.
If police exceeded their authority, the evidence they found can be excluded from court, leading to withdrawn or dismissed charges.
Key Rights Examined by Your Toronto Drug Trafficking Lawyer
Every police investigation in Canada must be conducted in strict compliance with the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Drug cases, which often arise from intense police surveillance, searches, and detentions, are particularly rich ground for Charter challenges. When police officers make mistakes or overstep their authority, the evidence they find can be thrown out of court.
Two of the most crucial rights in a drug trafficking case are Section 8 and Section 9 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
Section 8 — The Right Against Unreasonable Search and Seizure
This section protects your privacy. Police usually need a warrant, based on reasonable and probable grounds, to search you, your home, or your car. Warrantless searches are presumptively unreasonable and unlawful.
Section 9 — The Right Against Arbitrary Detention
The police cannot stop or detain you without a legally valid reason. They are not allowed to act on a hunch or engage in a “fishing expedition.” If your detention was unlawful, any evidence discovered as a result may be inadmissible.
If a judge finds that the police violated your constitutional rights in finding the drugs, the evidence can be excluded from your trial. Without the drugs, there is no case, and the charges are typically withdrawn or dismissed.
The Daniel Brown Law Advantage:
Our lawyers are known for meticulous Charter applications. We dig into every detail of the investigation — from wiretap authorizations to search warrants — to expose police overreach and protect your rights.
🎯 Understanding the Charges: Trafficking vs. Possession for the Purpose (P4P)
Under the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act (CDSA), the Crown may lay one or both of the following serious charges.
1) The Broad Definition of “Trafficking”
The first surprise for many people is that the legal definition of “trafficking” under Canada’s Controlled Drugs and Substances Act (CDSA) is far broader than simply selling drugs for money. According to section 2(1) of the CDSA, trafficking includes any act of giving, transferring, transporting, sending, or delivering a controlled substance. You do not have to receive money or anything of value to be found guilty. Simply giving a controlled substance to another person, or transporting it for them, legally constitutes trafficking. Most shockingly, the law states that a mere offer to do any of those things is also considered trafficking. This is true even if no drugs are ever produced and no money ever changes hands. An agreement made in a text message or a conversation can be enough for the Crown to lay a trafficking charge. This broad definition catches many people unaware — exposing them to the possibility of imprisonment for conduct that might have seemed harmless or misunderstood. Because penalties for Schedule I substances (cocaine, fentanyl, heroin) can reach life imprisonment, experienced representation is critical. Learn more in our Drug Trafficking (Toronto) legal commentary.
2) Possession for the Purpose of Trafficking (P4P)
A related and very common charge is “Possession for the Purpose of Trafficking” (P4P), outlined in section 5(2) of the CDSA.
For a P4P charge, the Crown doesn’t need to prove a drug transaction occurred. Instead, they must show:
You possessed a controlled substance; and
You intended to traffic it.
Since it’s impossible to know what someone was thinking, the Crown builds its case for “intent” using circumstantial evidence. An expert defence lawyer scrutinizes this evidence, which often includes:
The quantity of the drugs (an amount considered greater than what would be for personal use).
How the drugs are packaged (for example, divided into numerous small baggies for individual sale).
The presence of large amounts of cash, particularly if it’s bundled in a manner consistent with drug sales.
The presence of drug paraphernalia associated with selling, such as digital scales, packaging materials, or debt lists (“score sheets”).
These items, found together, can be used to construct a powerful narrative that your possession was for the purpose of selling, even if there is no direct evidence of a single transaction. A skilled Toronto drug lawyer challenges these assumptions, demonstrating that the evidence may equally support personal use, proximity, or lack of intent.
When it comes to sentencing, not all trafficking cases are treated alike. Canadian courts view drug operations as a hierarchy and the potential penalty you face is heavily influenced by where the prosecution alleges you fall within that structure.
Five general categories of participants in the drug trade include:
Street-level seller
Street-level supplier
Supplier to street-level suppliers
Distributor to suppliers
Importer to distributors
Your legal jeopardy changes dramatically depending on your alleged role. For example, a person caught transporting multiple kilograms of a drug as a courier may face a less severe sentence than a street-level supplier who manages and profits from the operation, even though the quantity of drugs involved was much smaller. An experienced defence lawyer will challenge the Crown’s characterization of your role and ensure the court has a true and complete picture of the circumstances.
At Daniel Brown Law, we have successfully reduced charges and penalties by exposing exaggerated claims about a client’s role or intent. We know how to present mitigating evidence and advocate for proportionate outcomes ensuring the court sees your involvement accurately and fairly. Where appropriate, we pursue charge reductions, withdrawals, or non-custodial sentences.
Conclusion: What to Do Next
The law surrounding drug trafficking is complex: the definition of the offence is surprisingly wide, your specific role in the alleged events is a critical factor, and the penalties are severe. Above all, the legality of the police investigation is the foundation upon which the entire prosecution rests.
A drug trafficking charge is not just about the evidence the Crown has against you; it’s about the entire story of how that evidence was gathered. The critical question you must now ask is: Was every step of that story legal? Answering that question requires immediate help from an experienced criminal defence lawyer.
🧠 How Daniel Brown Law Builds Powerful Drug Defences
When your freedom is at stake, you need a defence team that combines legal excellence with courtroom tenacity. That’s where Daniel Brown Law stands apart.
Our Toronto drug trafficking lawyers are recognized leaders in criminal law, with decades of combined experience defending complex drug prosecutions across Ontario. We approach every case with precision and purpose.
Our Proven Defence Strategies Include:
Challenging illegal searches, wiretaps, and surveillance
Exposing unreliable confidential informants
Contesting forensic analysis and drug purity testing
Arguing entrapment or abuse of process
Negotiating charge reductions or pre-trial withdrawals
We don’t wait for the Crown’s next move — we anticipate it. Our defence begins the moment you contact us.
When your reputation, career, and future are at risk, you deserve more than just representation — you deserve results.
Nationally Recognized: Named one of Canada’s Top Criminal Law Boutiques by Canadian Lawyer Magazine.
Award-Winning Lawyers: Listed in Best Lawyers in Canada for Criminal Defence year after year.
Trusted by the Profession: Other lawyers and journalists turn to Daniel Brown and Mark Halfyard for insight on criminal law and constitutional litigation.
Proven Success in Drug Cases: From dismissed charges to acquittals, our track record speaks for itself.
Client-Focused Advocacy: We treat every client with dignity, discretion, and unwavering commitment.
When your freedom is on the line, you need the defence team that prosecutors respect and judges recognize. You need Daniel Brown Law.
❓ Drug Trafficking in Toronto — Frequently Asked Questions
1) Should I talk to the police if I’m being investigated for drug trafficking?
No. Exercise your right to silence and ask to speak with a lawyer. Anything you say can be used against you.
2) Can the police search my car or phone without a warrant?
It depends on the circumstances. Warrantless searches are presumptively unreasonable. We review the search closely and may apply to exclude the evidence.
3) What is “possession for the purpose of trafficking” (P4P)?
The Crown must prove possession and an intent to traffic, often using circumstantial indicators like quantity, packaging, cash, or scales. These can be challenged.
4) I was just a courier. Does that change sentencing?
Role matters. Couriers can face different sentencing ranges than organizers. We work to establish your true level of involvement and seek proportionate outcomes.
5) Will I go to jail for a first offence?
Penalties vary with the substance, quantity, role, and the strength of the evidence. Outcomes range from withdrawals or reductions to non-custodial sentences and jail.
6) How soon should I hire a lawyer?
Immediately. Early intervention lets us protect your rights, gather defence evidence, and start challenging the Crown’s case right away.
📞 Speak to a Toronto Drug Trafficking Lawyer Today
A drug trafficking charge isn’t just about what the Crown claims to have found — it’s about whether every step the police took was legal. The sooner you involve a Toronto criminal defence lawyer, the better your chances of success. Do not speak to police before speaking to us.
Contact Daniel Brown Law immediately for a confidential consultation to review your case, challenge the police investigation, and begin building your defence.
The sudden flash of red and blue lights in your rear-view mirror is a moment of panic. Your heart races and your mind spins: What did I do? What happens next? For many people stopped on suspicion of impaired driving, this is only the beginning of a difficult legal journey through a system that is stricter—and more complicated—than they expect.
Many people think they understand “DUI” laws, but Canadian impaired driving law changed dramatically when Bill C-46 came into force. The rules, defences, and legal definitions have all shifted. What used to be common knowledge may now lead you into serious legal trouble.
If you are charged with impaired driving in Toronto, it’s critical to have accurate legal advice. Outdated information and online myths can make your situation worse. Below are five surprising truths about impaired driving law in Ontario—and why having an experienced Toronto criminal lawyer can make the difference between a conviction and an acquittal.
1. You Don’t Need to Be Driving to Be Guilty: The Law of “Care or Control”
One of the most common and perilous misconceptions is that you can’t be charged with impaired driving if the car isn’t moving. Many people believe that if they’ve had too much to drink, the responsible choice is to “sleep it off” in their car until they’re sober. Unfortunately, under Canadian law, this responsible choice can still lead to a criminal conviction. The Criminal Code makes it an offence to operate a vehicle while impaired or over the legal limit. Crucially, the legal definition of “operate” includes not just driving, but also having “care or control” of the vehicle. This means that simply being in a position to put the vehicle in motion can be enough to be found guilty. The law even includes a powerful presumption against you. Section 320.35 of the Criminal Code states that if you are found occupying the driver’s seat, you are presumed to have care or control of the vehicle. This creates a “reverse onus” situation. In most criminal cases, the burden is entirely on the Crown to prove a person is guilty. This ‘reverse onus’ provision is a rare and formidable exception for impaired driving cases, and it puts the accused at a significant disadvantage from the start. Instead of the Crown having to prove you intended to drive, you must prove, on a balance of probabilities, that you did not intend to set the vehicle in motion. This is an incredibly difficult standard to meet. Even if you successfully rebut that presumption—for example, by proving you got in the car only to make a phone call or find shelter—the Crown can still secure a conviction by proving de facto (or factual) care or control. To do this, they must show that your actions created a “realistic risk of danger.”
Courts will look at a list of factors to determine this risk, including:
Your level of impairment.
Whether the keys were in the ignition or easily accessible.
The location of the vehicle (e.g., parked on a public road vs. a private driveway).
Whether you had a concrete, reliable, and implemented alternate plan to get home (e.g., proof you called a taxi that was on its way).
The Strategic Bottom Line: The law empowers the police to charge you based on a future risk. Your ‘responsible’ decision to sleep it off can be twisted into a criminal act, forcing you to prove your own innocence—a reversal of the normal burden of proof that is incredibly difficult to overcome in court.
2. The Two-Hour Rule: Drinking After Driving Can Still Lead to a Charge
This is perhaps the most counter-intuitive change to impaired driving law. Under the old system, the Crown had to prove your blood alcohol concentration (BAC) was over the legal limit at the time you were driving. The new law, under section 320.14(1)(b) of the Criminal Code, creates a fundamentally different offence: having a BAC of 80 milligrams of alcohol or more in 100 millilitres of blood within two hours of having operated a vehicle. This change turns the old law on its head. The critical window is no longer just the time of driving, but the two hours after you’ve stopped. This new rule was specifically designed to eliminate a notorious legal loophole known as the “intervening drink defence.” In the past, a person involved in an accident could claim they consumed alcohol after the crash but before the police arrived. They would argue their BAC was under the legal limit while driving and only went over 80 because of the post-driving drinks. That is no longer possible. The law now effectively criminalizes most forms of post-driving drinking. The focus has shifted entirely: Society is endangered by drinking and driving, but not by driving then drinking. To avoid criminalizing innocent post-driving drinking behaviour, section 320.14(5) of the Criminal Code provides a defence for individuals who consume alcohol or drugs after driving. However, this defence is exceptionally narrow. To use it, you must prove not only that you drank after driving, but also that you had no reasonable expectation that you would be required to provide a breath or blood sample. If you’ve been in an accident or were pulled over, it is almost impossible to argue you couldn’t have expected the police would make a breath demand. This change represents a seismic shift, closing a loophole that frustrated prosecutions for decades.
Why This Is a Trap: The law is so focused on eliminating the old loophole that it can catch people who legitimately drink after arriving home. If you have a drink and the police show up at your door within two hours of you driving, you are presumed guilty. You then have to prove that you had no reason to believe the police would demand a sample—a difficult and unexpected legal battle.
3. Refusing a Breath Test Is Its Own Crime—With Harsher Penalties
Let’s be blunt: the idea that you can outsmart the police by refusing a breathalyzer is a myth, and following that myth is a strategic blunder with severe consequences. The thinking is that without a breath sample, the Crown can’t prove you were over the legal limit. This is fundamentally wrong and is some of the worst advice you could ever follow. Refusing to provide a sample to police when they have made a lawful demand is a separate criminal offence under section 320.15(1) of the Criminal Code. It is not a loophole; it is a crime in itself. In many ways, it is an easier charge for the Crown to prove. To convict you of impaired driving, the prosecutor must present evidence of your impairment. For a refusal charge, the mental element (mens rea) the Crown must prove is simply that you knew a breath demand was made and you failed or refused to comply. The Supreme Court of Canada has made the distinction clear, stating that the crime is one of disobedience, not impairment: Culpability for the refusal offence is based on disobedience with lawful compulsion, whereas culpability for an “over 80” offence is based on driving with a blood-alcohol concentration over the legal limit. Not only is it a separate crime, but the penalties are often more severe. For a first-time offence, the mandatory minimum fine for refusing a breathalyzer in Canada is $2,000. This is double the minimum $1,000 fine for a first-offence impaired driving charge or a low-level “over 80” conviction. While the law allows for a “reasonable excuse” for refusing, courts have interpreted this defence so narrowly that common reasons—like confusion, a mistake about the law, or even bad advice from a lawyer—are consistently rejected.
The Strategic Bottom Line: Refusing the breathalyzer does not save you from a charge; it hands the Crown a different, and often easier, conviction. The penalties are harsher, and the defences are almost non-existent. It is a strategic dead end.
4. Drug-Impaired Driving: Feeling Sober Doesn’t Mean You’re Safe
With the legalization of cannabis, the laws around drug-impaired driving have become a minefield for many drivers. Unlike alcohol, where the charge of “impaired driving” often focuses on your physical signs of intoxication, the law for many drugs has shifted to a much stricter model based on per se limits. Per se limits make it a criminal offence to have a prohibited concentration of a specific drug in your blood within two hours of driving, regardless of whether you were actually impaired. Your personal tolerance, how you felt, or whether you believed you were safe to drive are completely irrelevant. If the concentration of the drug in your blood is over the prescribed limit, you are guilty of a crime. For Tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), the primary psychoactive component in cannabis, the law creates several offences based on nanograms (ng) per millilitre (ml) of blood, including a less serious offence for 2-5 ng/ml and a more serious one for 5 ng/ml or more. This is a radical departure from the traditional focus on impairment. In fact, the foundational science itself, as outlined in the “Report on Drug Per Se Limits” from the Canadian Society of Forensic Sciences, acknowledges that these per se limits are not necessarily linked to a driver’s actual impairment. Imagine this scenario: You use legal cannabis on a Saturday evening. On Tuesday morning, you are pulled over for a broken taillight. You feel completely sober—and you are. However, if an officer has grounds to demand a blood sample that reveals a THC concentration over the legal limit, you can be criminally charged, even though the psychoactive effects wore off days earlier. This is the new reality of drug-impaired driving law.
The Trap Here Is Obvious: With legalized cannabis, the law is no longer about whether you feel impaired, but about what a blood test finds. You can feel perfectly sober and still be charged with a crime for a decision you made days ago.
5. The Licence Suspension Trap: A Criminal Ban Can Become a Lifetime Loss
If you are convicted of an impaired driving offence, you will be prohibited from driving for a period of time. What almost no one understands is that this is not a single penalty, but a complex puzzle of overlapping punishments from two different levels of government—and confusing them can have catastrophic consequences. When you are sentenced, the judge imposes a criminal driving prohibition under the Criminal Code. For a first offence, this is a mandatory minimum of one year. At the same time, your conviction automatically triggers a separate and distinct provincial licence suspension from Ontario’s Ministry of Transportation (MTO). This is an administrative penalty, not a criminal one, and its rules are completely different. The crucial point is that the provincial suspension is often much longer than the criminal prohibition. Here is a common and devastating example: for a third impaired driving conviction in Ontario, a judge might impose a three-year criminal driving prohibition. However, the MTO will automatically suspend that person’s driver’s licence for life. This creates a legal trap for the unwary. After three years, the court-ordered prohibition ends. The person might believe they are now free to get back on the road. But the lifetime provincial suspension remains in effect. Driving during that period—even though the criminal prohibition is over—is still a separate criminal offence called “Operating while prohibited” under section 320.18 of the Criminal Code.
Why This Is a Trap: The criminal court system and the provincial ministry system do not align. Believing your sentence is over when the judge’s order expires is a natural, but legally fatal, mistake. The consequence is not just a traffic ticket, but a new criminal record and potentially jail time.
As we’ve seen, the laws governing impaired driving in Toronto and across Ontario are far more complex and filled with more counter-intuitive rules than most people realize. From being convicted without moving an inch to facing a lifetime ban you never knew about, the landscape is treacherous for anyone trying to navigate it without expert guidance. The law is designed to be strict, but its hidden complexities can feel like traps for the unwary. If you’re facing these charges, the most important question isn’t whether you made a mistake—it’s whether you fully understand the legal maze that lies ahead. Early advice from an experienced impaired driving lawyer in Toronto can protect your rights and your future.
The award winning lawyers at Daniel Brown Law have successfully defended countless impaired driving charges in Ontario and our team of drinking and driving law experts can help guide you through the process of defending your case.
Charged with impaired driving, over 80, refusal, drug-impaired driving, or operating while prohibited?
You hear the police siren blaring. Your heart races as the officer walks up and says: “I’m demanding you provide a sample of your breath into an approved screening device.”
In that split second, you have a choice: blow or refuse. Many people think refusing is safer. Under Canadian law, that assumption can be dangerously wrong.
If you’ve been stopped by police in the GTA and asked for a roadside breath sample, your next decision matters. Refusing a breathalyzer in Ontario is its own criminal offence with penalties that can be harsher than “over 80.” Below, Toronto criminal defence lawyers at Daniel Brown Law explain seven key truths about refusal charges—what they are, how they’re proven, and where real defences can arise. This article explains, in plain language, how the refusal offence works and why the law pushes drivers to comply. It isn’t legal advice—just a clear guide to the rules, penalties, and common issues that decide these cases.
What Happens at the Roadside?
The decision to refuse a breathalyzer demand is not a simple “yes” or “no.” It triggers a separate and distinct criminal charge with its own unique set of rules, penalties, and defences. The following points break down the most impactful and often misunderstood aspects of refusing a breathalyzer demand in Ontario.
A police officer who reasonably suspects you have alcohol in your body can demand a sample into an Approved Screening Device (ASD) “as soon as practicable.” In that high-pressure moment, many drivers wonder: Should I refuse? The following seven points show why that choice often makes things worse—and where strong defences can still be built.
The 7 Things You Absolutely Must Understand Before Considering a Refusal
Refusing a breath demand is its own criminal charge with its own penalties and defences. Here are the key points most people miss.
1) The Penalty for Saying “No” Can Be Harsher Than Blowing Over
Here is perhaps the most counter-intuitive fact about refusing a breath sample: for a first-time offender, the minimum fine for refusal is higher than the minimum fine for blowing over the legal limit, unless your blood alcohol concentration (BAC) is exceptionally high. The law is deliberately designed this way. This is not an oversight; it is an intentional legislative choice. The law is structured so that the higher penalty removes any incentive to fail or refuse to comply with a demand. The aim is to punish the act of refusal so severely that compliance becomes the more logical option from a purely financial perspective. This directly contradicts the common assumption that refusing is the ‘safer’ legal bet to avoid a drinking and driving conviction.
Offence
Minimum Fine
Refusal to provide breath sample
$2,000
80–119 mg/100 mL
$1,000
120–159 mg/100 mL
$1,500
160+ mg/100 mL
$2,000
Refusal also triggers automatic licence suspensions and other consequences similar to impaired-driving offences.
2) You’re Not Charged With Impairment; You’re Charged With Disobedience
When you are charged with refusing a breath sample, the Crown prosecutor’s job is not to prove you were drunk. The legal battleground shifts completely. You are being charged with disobeying a lawful order from a peace officer. This distinction is fundamental to understanding the nature of the offence. While the refusal offence is part of the same statutory regime, it is different from other drinking and driving offences in substance. Culpability for the refusal offence is based on disobedience with lawful compulsion, whereas culpability for an “over 80” offence is based on driving with a blood-alcohol concentration over the legal limit. This means the focus of the trial will not be on your level of sobriety, your driving pattern, or how many drinks you had. The central question is whether a peace officer gave you a valid, lawful demand and you failed or refused to comply with it. Your state of mind regarding impairment is secondary to your act of non-compliance. A refusal case isn’t about whether you were impaired. It’s about disobeying a lawful police demand. The Crown focuses on whether a valid demand was made and whether you failed or refused to comply. Your level of intoxication is usually secondary.
3) An Officer’s Mistake Can Be Your Best Defence
Because refusal is about lawful compulsion, the validity of the demand is critical. The Crown must prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, that:
The demand was made by a peace officer;
The officer had a reasonable suspicion you had alcohol in your body (for an ASD demand);
The demand was made as soon as practicable.
If any statutory precondition wasn’t met—no objective grounds, improper timing, or other defects—the police officer’s legal demand for a breath sample may be invalid, and the refusal charge can fail. You can raise these defects directly at trial; you don’t always need a separate Charter application to do it.
4) Most “Reasonable Excuses” Are Not Reasonable in Court
You can defend a refusal if you had a “reasonable excuse”, but courts set a high bar and you must prove it on a balance of probabilities. Excuses that usually fail:
“I was too drunk to comply.”
“I thought I could speak to a lawyer first at roadside.”
“My lawyer told me not to blow.”
A genuine excuse typically involves a real, documented inability to provide a sample at that moment (for example, a serious medical issue), often backed by medical evidence. Simply saying you have a medical condition is not enough.
5) The Law Just Got Crystal Clear on Your State of Mind
For years, courts debated what mental state the Crown needed to prove. Parliament ended the debate by making legislative changes to the Criminal Code the Crown Attorney only has to show you knew a demand had been made. It doesn’t need to prove you intended to refuse—just that you knew and didn’t comply.
6) You Can’t Take It Back: A Refusal Is Final
Once you clearly refuse—“I’m not blowing”—the offence is complete. Changing your mind minutes later usually won’t undo it. Whether your conduct amounts to an <strong”>unequivocal refusal is a factual question the judge must answer at your trial. In some cases, silence wasn’t enough; but a clear verbal refusal almost always counts.
7) Your Roadside Statements Can Be Used Against You (In a Refusal Case)
Normally, what you say to a police officer at roadside before you’re advised of your rights can be hard to use against you for impaired driving. Refusal is different. The words “I refuse” are the act that completes the offence. They are typically admissible to prove the charge.
Conclusion:
Refusing a breath sample carries serious, often misunderstood consequences. The law is built to encourage compliance and punish refusal, sometimes more than the drinking-and-driving offences it investigates. In these cases, the officer’s procedure matters as much as the driver’s actions. A choice you make in seconds on a Toronto roadside can affect you for years. It isn’t about guessing right in the moment—it’s about understanding the rules before you face them.
Evidence integrity review: notes, video, disclosure gaps, and officer memory.
Medical/physical capability: where appropriate, obtain expert support for true “reasonable excuse” arguments.
Charter litigation (when warranted): unlawful detention, delay, or rights violations that may exclude evidence.
Negotiation & resolutions: where facts allow, pursue withdrawals or reduced outcomes.
FAQs: Refusing a Breath Sample in Ontario
Is refusing better than blowing over?
Usually no. Minimum fines for refusal are often higher, and the collateral consequences are severe.
Do I have the right to call a lawyer before a roadside ASD test?
Generally no. The right to counsel typically arises upon arrest/detention for further testing—not for the initial ASD demand.
Can medical issues be a “reasonable excuse”?
Sometimes, but the standard is strict and usually requires medical proof tied to the exact testing moment.
Can I change my mind after saying “no”?
Once a refusal is unequivocal, the offence is complete. Changing your mind moments later rarely helps.
What are the immediate consequences of being charged with refusing to provide a breath sample?
Refusing a breath sample in Toronto leads to immediate, severe penalties, including a 90-day license suspension, a 7-day vehicle impoundment, fines, and a criminal record. A refusal is a criminal offence that results in a permanent criminal record and can have long-term consequences like difficulty with employment or travel. It is strongly recommended to consult with a criminal lawyer if you are facing this charge.
Criminal penalties and other consequences of refusing to provide a breath sample
Criminal record: A permanent criminal record, which can impact employment, travel (including to the US), and immigration status
Fines: A mandatory fine of at least $1,000
License suspension: A longer license suspension is likely in addition to the initial administrative one
Ignition interlock device: required to install an ignition interlock device
Mandatory programs: Participation in a Back on Track program or mandatory alcohol counseling
Insurance: Significantly higher insurance rates
What should I do after being charged?
Get legal advice immediately. Early strategy and disclosure requests can significantly affect the outcome. Call 416-297-7200.
Talk to a Toronto criminal lawyer now
If you’ve been charged with refusing to provide a breath sample (Criminal Code s. 320.15(1)) anywhere in the GTA, timing matters. Speak with an experienced defence lawyer at Daniel Brown Law to understand your options and protect your record. Phone: 416-297-7200. Website: https://www.danielbrownlaw.ca/. Office: Downtown Toronto — serving Toronto, Peel, York, Durham, and across Ontario. This article is for general information only and is not legal advice. Every case turns on its own facts.
We’re proud to announce the newest members of our team at Daniel Brown Law: Jason Dos Santos, Ema Ibrakovic, and Thomas McCann. Each brings unique experience and expertise that will further strengthen our ability to deliver exceptional criminal defence to our clients.
Jason Dos Santos — Partner & Experienced Trial Lawyer
Jason joins the firm as a Partner, bringing extensive courtroom experience and a proven record of defending complex criminal cases. Over the course of his career, he has appeared in more than one thousand criminal trials before both the Ontario Court of Justice and the Superior Court of Justice.
Jason has defended individuals charged with the most serious offences, including first-degree murder, organized crime, firearms and drug offences, sexual assault, domestic assault, and impaired driving. His strategic advocacy, combined with his steady presence in high-stakes litigation, makes him a formidable voice for his clients.
At Daniel Brown Law, Jason strengthens our trial practice and serves as a mentor to the next generation of defence lawyers, ensuring that every client benefits from his deep knowledge and sharp courtroom skills.
Ema Ibrakovic — Associate Lawyer with Appellate Insight
Ema joins us as an Associate Lawyer, bringing with her a wealth of academic and practical experience. She has clerked at the Ontario Superior Court, the Court of Appeal for Ontario, and the Supreme Court of Canada, providing her with rare insight into judicial decision-making at every level of court.
Graduating as Valedictorian from the University of Toronto Faculty of Law, Ema excelled in competitive mooting, competing in the Gale Cup and Grand Moot, and later coached law students in appellate advocacy.
Her practice focuses on both trials and appeals, where she applies her appellate expertise and sharp analytical skills to develop strategic arguments. Clients benefit not only from her intellectual rigour, but also from her commitment to ensuring they feel heard and supported throughout the legal process.
Thomas McCann — Associate Lawyer with Prosecution & Defence Experience
Thomas expands our litigation team as an Associate Lawyer, with experience on both sides of the courtroom. Before joining Daniel Brown Law, he worked as an Assistant Crown Attorney, prosecuting organized crime and serious drug cases. This perspective allows him to anticipate prosecutorial strategies and craft defence approaches that are proactive and effective.
A graduate of Osgoode Hall Law School, Thomas was a leader in the criminal law division of the school’s legal clinic, where he represented vulnerable clients. Since then, he has conducted jury trials, preliminary inquiries, constitutional challenges, and bail hearings, giving him wide-ranging experience across the criminal law spectrum.
Thomas is passionate about guiding clients through the justice system with skill and compassion, ensuring they are fully supported at every stage of their case.
At Daniel Brown Law, we know that every client’s case deserves both skill and dedication. With Jason, Ema, and Thomas joining our team, we’ve expanded our depth of trial and appellate experience, enhanced our strategic insight, and reinforced our commitment to client care.
Please join us in welcoming these three outstanding lawyers to the firm. We look forward to the contributions they will make to our clients and to the broader legal community.
About Daniel Brown Law
For nearly two decades, we have represented both organizations and individuals in criminal litigation at trial and on appeal. Our firm has consistently been recognized as one of Canada’s top criminal law boutiques by Canadian Lawyer Magazine and nationally ranked among the country’s best criminal defence firms by Best Lawyers. We remain committed to delivering superior advice and advocacy, guided by the same innovation and dedication on which our firm was founded. Our lawyers regularly appear before trial courts across Ontario, the Court of Appeal for Ontario, and the Supreme Court of Canada in complex, serious, and precedent-setting cases.
Alex Formenton was barely 18 years old and on the verge of a promising professional hockey career that came to a screeching halt on June 18, 2018, after what was meant to be a night of celebration with his coaches and teammates.
For the last seven years, he has lived under a dark cloud. The public now knows what Alex has always maintained: that he is innocent of this false allegation – but only after his case erupted into a massively publicized social cause.
Alex’s face has appeared on millions of screens and newspaper pages. There can be little doubt that an untold number of people believed he was guilty simply because he had been accused of a crime, long before any evidence was presented in court.
This rush to judgment – to believe the worst of people – is one of the most regrettable of human traits. So, too, is our reluctance to change that opinion, even when it is proved wrong after a full and fair trial.
Notwithstanding Justice Carroccia’s unequivocal exoneration of Alex, there will inevitably be those who will still believe that he committed a crime.
Nobody in room 209 that night has emerged unscarred. The criminal court process is a bruising experience for anyone, but never more than when a case is a high profile and incorporates such high stakes.
In Alex’s case, he was condemned and felt banished from society. This experience has been crushing. Nevertheless, the impact of this case has changed Alex as a person and has matured him well beyond his years. It is inevitable that some people will not forgive Alex for what he was accused of doing. Others, however, will understand that this tragic matter rightly comes to an end today.
Alex has never minimized his role in this sexual encounter or denied engaging in consensual sex with the complainant. He fully cooperated with the police investigation and provided investigators with an honest account of the events that unfolded in his hotel room back in 2018.
Alex’s narrative is not conjecture. His police statement was corroborated at trial by several Crown witnesses, by video evidence, and was even supported in large measure by the complainant’s own testimony.
While no police investigation is perfect, the London Police got it right seven years ago by deciding it would be a mistake to charge Alex. The evidence always demonstrated that he did not commit a sexual assault. However, political and media pressure brought this allegation back into the spotlight in 2022 and the Crown Attorney knowingly forged ahead with a hopeless prosecution.
Besides the human toll to everyone involved, this lengthy legal proceeding exhausted scarce police and court resources that could have been redirected elsewhere to support our already overburdened justice system.
Alex, his family, and his defence team are grateful to Justice Carroccia for carefully considering all the evidence presented at this trial with an open mind. She has reached a just and correct verdict that must be respected.
Nobody disputes that sexual assault is a terrible, societal plague, and Alex sincerely hopes that this prosecution does not stop the quest to combat sexual violence and to bring genuine offenders to justice.
However, an accusation is just that – an accusation. This case stands for the fact that we must never lose sight of the fundamental right to be presumed innocent.
Now more than ever before, a fair response to sexual assault claims requires a balanced perspective and public trust in the decision making of the courts. Anything less only harms the justice system, and the cause of eliminating sexual violence.
Sincerely,
Daniel Brown & Hilary Dudding.
About Daniel Brown LawLLP:
For two decades, we have represented organizations and individuals in criminal litigation at trial and on appeal. Our firm has repeatedly been recognized as one of Canada’s top criminal law boutiques by Canadian Lawyer Magazine and nationally ranked as one of Canada’s best criminal defence firms by Best Lawyers. We remain dedicated to superior advice and advocacy using the same innovation and dedication on which our firm was founded. We regularly appear before trial courts across the province, the Court of Appeal for Ontario, and the Supreme Court of Canada on complex, serious, and precedent-setting cases.
Daniel Brown Law LLP is a Toronto-based boutique law firm specializing in criminal trials and appeals. We are looking for an associate lawyer to join our office.
About Daniel Brown LawLLP:
For nearly two decades, we have represented organizations and individuals in criminal litigation at trial and on appeal. Our firm has repeatedly been recognized as one of Canada’s top criminal law boutiques by Canadian Lawyer Magazine and nationally ranked as one of Canada’s best criminal defence firms by Best Lawyers. We remain dedicated to superior advice and advocacy using the same innovation and dedication on which our firm was founded. We regularly appear before trial courts across the province, the Court of Appeal for Ontario, and the Supreme Court of Canada on complex, serious, and precedent-setting cases.
Job Description:
We are seeking an associate with a passion for criminal defence work to join our growing team of trial and appeal lawyers. The ideal candidate is a 0-7 year call, interested in managing and litigating their own assigned trial and appellate matters and acting as co-counsel for more complicated criminal cases.
We are looking for a lawyer who thinks critically, works well with a team, and can effectively manage their time on a wide range of tasks. While prior criminal law experience is an asset, it is not a requirement for the position.
The associate’s work assignments would include:
Conducting initial consultations with clients to assess client goals and provide preliminary legal advice;
Representing clients throughout their cases, including pre-trial negotiations and court preparation;
Drafting applications, factums, and other court documents;
Legal research;
Conducting bail hearings;
Arguing contested applications;
Representing clients at trial or on appeal; and
Legal writing including content for books, papers, and articles.
We take mentorship seriously. In addition to working collaboratively on the firm’s files alongside senior lawyers, we will regularly meet to discuss emerging legal issues and trial strategy as well as professional development. The chosen candidate will have the opportunity to learn how to build all aspects of their criminal defence practice from the ground up.
We encourage applications from equity-seeking groups.
Compensation:
The salary for this position will be commensurate with the applicant’s skills and experience and ranges from $90,000 to $150,000, plus benefits, insurance, and Law Society fees. This position is eligible for annual salary review and the potential for both bonuses and profit-sharing opportunities.
How to Apply:
Please forward a cover letter, resumé, writing sample, transcripts, and two reference letters or the names of two referees to Daniel Brown at brown@danielbrownlaw.ca.
All applications will be held in confidence. Only those candidates selected for an interview will be contacted.
Daniel Brown Law LLP is thrilled to announce the addition of Maxime Bédard who joins us as an associate lawyer.
Maxime Bédard
Maxime’s defence practice focuses on both criminal trials and appeals.
Prior to joining Daniel Brown Law, Maxime worked as a judicial law clerk for Justice Kasirer at the Supreme Court of Canada and for Justice Gagné at the Quebec Court of Appeal. These experiences provided Maxime with unique insight into crafting successful appellate arguments that assist him with approaching legal problems from a judicial perspective, combining rigorous analysis with a humane approach to the law.
Maxime also honed his skills as a litigator while working as an associate at one of Canada’s premier national law firms where he contributed to a variety of criminal and constitutional law files.
Maxime graduated from Laval University’s Faculty of Law as the class valedictorian and served as the President of the Law Student Association. Raised in a bilingual environment, Maxime is perfectly equipped to provide legal representation in both French and English
For nearly two decades, Daniel Brown Law LLP has represented organizations and individuals in complex criminal litigation at trial and on appeal. Recognized as one of Canada’s best criminal defence boutiques by Canadian Lawyer Magazine, we remain dedicated to superior advice and advocacy through the same innovation and dedication on which our firm was founded.
Daniel Brown Law LLP is thrilled to announce the addition of two lawyers to the firm. Samantha Bondoux and Robert Nanni have joined us as associates.
Samantha Bondoux
Samantha’s practice focuses on criminal trials and appeals and she represents those charged with or convicted of all Criminal Code offences.
Before joining Daniel Brown Law, Samantha worked for the Ministry of the Attorney General at the Crown Law Office – Criminal (Toronto) where she worked on complex criminal appeals including appeals of serious offences of sexual assault, drug trafficking, and first-degree murder. She also clerked for some of Canada’s most respected criminal law judges at the Court of Appeal for Ontario, including Justices Simmons, Trotter, and Paciocco.
Samantha completed her law degree at Queen’s University where she graduated with the Silver Medal in Law for second highest standing, and received a number of awards including course prizes in constitutional law and the law of international crime and armed conflict. Samantha has also completed certificate in international law focusing on international criminal law, and she has a Bachelor of Science from McGill University. Learn more about Samantha here.
Robert’s practice focuses on criminal trials and appeals. His approach to advocacy is informed by his clerkship at the Court of Appeal for Ontario, where he clerked for Associate Chief Justice Fairburn, Justice Coroza, and Justice Favreau.
Prior to joining Daniel Brown Law, Robert worked as a litigation lawyer at a prestigious law firm in New York City. During that time, Robert assisted with a variety of cases, including pro bono matters involving wrongful convictions and prisoners’ rights, through which he continued to develop his advocacy skills.
Robert completed a joint Juris Doctor/Master of Business Administration at the University of Toronto. Robert also holds an Honours Bachelor of Science degree in chemistry and psychology at Western University, where he graduated as the gold medalist of his undergraduate program. Learn more about Robert here.
For nearly two decades, Daniel Brown Law LLP has represented organizations and individuals in complex criminal litigation at trial and on appeal. Recognized as one of Canada’s best criminal defence boutiques by Canadian Lawyer Magazine, we remain dedicated to superior advice and advocacy through the same innovation and dedication on which our firm was founded.
