Our past cases prove the practical and effective results in successfully defending and negotiating criminal charges. We will provide you with a step-by-step plan to defend your charges and ideally resolve before trial. Our criminal defence lawyer’s goal is to protect your criminal record and your freedom.
Criminal Defence Cases
Filter
R v P
Our client was charged with criminal harassment due to allegations of repeatedly communicating with the complainant. Tonii Roulston raised significant issues with the Crown, including that the alleged conduct did not meet the legal threshold for harassment and that the complainant could not reasonably be said to have feared for their safety, which is required to prove the offence of criminal harassment. for repeated communications. As a result, the matter was resolved by way of a Peace Bond. The charges were withdrawn, and our client avoided a criminal conviction and record.
R v P
Offence: Criminal Harassment (s.264(2)(b) CC)
Result: Peace Bond, Charges Withdrawn
Our client was charged with criminal harassment due to allegations of repeatedly communicating with the complainant. Tonii Roulston raised significant issues with the Crown, including that the alleged conduct did not meet the legal threshold for harassment and that the complainant could not reasonably be said to have feared for their safety, which is required to prove the offence of criminal harassment. for repeated communications. As a result, the matter was resolved by way of a Peace Bond. The charges were withdrawn, and our client avoided a criminal conviction and record.
R v I
Our client was charged with using, dealing with, or acting on a forged document contrary to section 368(1)(a) of the Criminal Code. After reviewing the disclosure, Tonii Roulston identified significant issues in the Crown’s case. These issues included whether the document met the legal definition of a “forged” or “fraudulent” document, as defined by the Criminal Code and Common Law, and whether our client possessed the required intent to actually use the forged document. Following Tonii’s negotiations with the Crown, where she highlighted these issues, the matter was resolved through the Alternative Measures Program (AMP).
R v I
Offence: Fraud (s.368(1)(a) CC)
Result: Alternative Measures Program (AMP), Charges Withdrawn
Our client was charged with using, dealing with, or acting on a forged document contrary to section 368(1)(a) of the Criminal Code. After reviewing the disclosure, Tonii Roulston identified significant issues in the Crown’s case. These issues included whether the document met the legal definition of a “forged” or “fraudulent” document, as defined by the Criminal Code and Common Law, and whether our client possessed the required intent to actually use the forged document. Following Tonii’s negotiations with the Crown, where she highlighted these issues, the matter was resolved through the Alternative Measures Program (AMP).
R v FGB
R v FGB
Kirsten Lancee defended FGB against allegations of possessing fentanyl for the purpose of trafficking, failing to comply with release conditions and failing to appear in court. Kirsten filed a Charter Notice, alleging that police had no reasonable grounds to arrest FGB and that the subsequent search of her backpack was in violation of section 8 of the Charter. The Crown reviewed the Charter Notice and ultimately agreed that there were significant triable issues. Kirsten successfully convinced the Crown to withdraw all charges against FGB in advance of trial. FGB has no criminal record as a result.
R v KES
R v KES
Kirsten Lancee defended KES against allegations of assault causing bodily harm and uttering death threats. Kirsten argued that the charges should be withdrawn as the initial contact was accidental and, following that accident, he responded to the complainant’s violence actions in self-defence. At trial, the charges against KES were dismissed and KES was found not guilty.
R v ZM
R v ZM
Kirsten Lancee defended ZM against allegations of assaulting his domestic partner and violating his release conditions to have no contact with the complainant. Kirsten argued that any evidence of the complainant’s name received by police was inadmissible hearsay without the cooperation of the complainant. In advance of trial, Kirsten successfully negotiated a peace bond for her client. ZM has no criminal record as a result.
R v RS
R v RS
Kirsten Lancee defended RS twice; in February 2026, for possessing methamphetamine and cocaine for the purpose of trafficking, and in March 2026, for possessing fentanyl and methamphetamine for the purpose of trafficking. In advance of each of the trials, Kirsten filed a Charter Notice, alleging that the police had violated her client’s rights to be free from warrantless search and seizure and to be free from arbitrary arrest. Additionally, Kirsten took issue with the continued outstanding disclosure from police. After reviewing the Charter Notices, the Crown elected to stay the proceedings against RS.
R v RLB
R v RLB
Kirsten Lancee defended RLB against domestic assault and uttering threats. Kirsten negotiated with the Crown in advance of trial and highlighted the issues with the complainant’s credibility. On the morning of trial, the Crown advised the trial judge that they would not be calling the complainant as a witness. The Court thus acquitted RLB.
R v AA
R v AA
Kirsten Lancee defended AA against an allegation of breaking and entering a residence. In advance of trial, Kirsten spoke with the Crown about the client’s proposed defence and argued that AA honestly believed she had consent to enter the residence, despite the complainant’s contrasting version of events. The Crown ultimately withdrew the charges against AA.
R v JJ
R v JJ
Kirsten Lancee defended JJ against an allegation of aggravated assault. The Crown was opposed to JJ’s release due to his existing criminal record, including violent convictions, and his bail plan. Kirsten argued that the client should be released into his parents’ care without requiring them to be his surety. The Court agreed and released JJ. JJ remained on release without issue as he awaited trial. Due to significant inconsistencies in the complainant’s version of events and the client’s compliance with release conditions, Kirsten secured a common-law peace bond for her client in advance of trial. The charge was withdrawn against JJ as a result.
R v AMG
R v AMG
Kirsten Lancee defended AMG against allegations of several serious charges, including possession of fentanyl for the purpose of trafficking, possession of methamphetamine for the purpose of trafficking, and possession of a loaded and restricted firearm. AMG was initially ordered detained in the Red Deer Court of Justice. Kirsten filed a bail review in the Court of King’s Bench and, following a contested hearing, successfully appealed the decision, which resulted in her client’s release from custody.
