Call: 416.605.4811
Weisberg Logo


R. v. S.S.

This client was facing a first-degree murder charge for the shooting of a security worker.  There were four co-accused.  The case involved cell tower records, video surveillance and forensic height analysis.  At the conclusion of the preliminary hearing, the case resolved for a manslaughter.  This was an excellent result.

R. v. H.S.

This client was facing a first-degree murder charge for beating and stabbing death of a young person.  There were five individuals charged.  Cell tower records and video surveillance along with eyewitness testimony were the basis for the charge.  Mr. Weisberg was able to demonstrate the innocence of his client and have the charges withdrawn.

R. v. T.S.

A young man believed to be a drug dealer was shot nearly a dozen times in a drug house. The client and his co-accused faced a first-degree murder charge.  The case involved cell records, tower information, video surveillance along with eyewitness testimony. At the conclusion of the preliminary hearing the client was discharged due to their being insufficient identification evidence.  A rare and excellent result.

R. v. S.J.

This client was facing a first-degree murder charge for the killing of a relative.  Mr. Weisberg conducted the preliminary inquiry and the charges were reduced to second-degree murder.  Mr. Weisberg and co-counsel conducted the trial advancing a not criminally responsible argument.  S.J. was found not criminally responsible for murder.

R. v. R.C.

This client was facing a first-degree murder charge for being the shooter in a tragic incident at a recreational centre. Charges reduced to 2nd-degree murder at the preliminary hearing. On the eve of trial, the client was offered and accepted a manslaughter charge on the basis that the firearm accidentally discharged.

R. v. E.J.

E.J. faced a charge of 1st-degree murder in the stabbing death of a man. The physical and eyewitness evidence that he was the stabber was overwhelming. In the middle of pre-trial motions, Mr. Weisberg negotiated a plea to 2nd-degree murder. The female accused that drove E.J. to the scene but did not participate in the actual killing was later found guilty of 1st-degree murder. This case was an example of advanced strategy and tactics that led to an excellent result.

R. v. D.D.

The client was a sixteen-year-old charged with shooting two men to death. He initially faced a 1st-degree murder and 2nd-degree murder charge. The killings occurred when two men invaded D.D.’s home with knives looking for drugs and money. The accused shot and killed one of the home invaders multiple times inside his bedroom. The second knife-wielder was shot and killed outside of the house, as he appeared to be retreating. Mr. Weisberg was able to secure a discharge of the 1st-degree murder count at the preliminary hearing. D.D. went to trial facing two counts of 2nd-degree murder. At trial, with co-counsel, a jury found D.D. not guilty of both murders as he acted in self-defence.

R. v. B.C.

The client was a youth charged with a home invasion robbery that went wrong. An elderly woman was tied up and a man killed execution style. Our client was alleged to have been present and a participant. A motion was brought to quash an order subpoenaing the youth to parallel adult proceedings. The charge of first-degree murder was eventually withdrawn.