Vancouver: 604 685 8889
Richmond: 604 370 3050
Surrey: 604 593 8580
Victoria: 250 384 0100
Nanaimo: 250 754 9558
Kelowna: 250 860 2766
Kamloops: 250 372 3448
Fort McMurray: 780 750 7588
Prince George: 250 564 8835
Copyright 2018 Acumen Law Corporation.
All Rights Reserved.
“I’m glad to have had Paul Doroshenko in my corner. I appreciated how he kept me in the loop with regards to my case. I felt confident about my chances with him there.”
B.G.
Criminal case results for Paul Doroshenko and the Vancouver lawyers at Acumen Law Corporation, a long established criminal law firm with offices in Vancouver, Victoria, Richmond and Surrey British Columbia.
After receiving a tip that a drug deal was going to take place, police organized surveillance. They observed a suspected drug deal. A few weeks later, they received a tip that the client was dealing out of his house. A search warrant was obtained and a significant quantity of cocaine, cash, and a firearm were discovered.
Police received a tip that a drug deal was going to occur involving a particular person and particular location and time. They hid in the bushes and observed an interaction between the parties take place. The police suspected this was a drug deal and arrested the client. A search located a few flaps of cocaine and some cash.
A few weeks later, the police received another tip. This time they were told the client was selling cocaine from his residence. Surveillance of the residence showed nothing consistent with trafficking. A search warrant was obtained, and ultimately a large quantity of cocaine was found in the back yard.
The initial arrest was not lawful. The police had no reason to believe a drug deal had taken place. The officer added unbelievable details to his evidence which were shown to be unreliable during cross examination. The search warrant was not validly obtained. Through cross-examination on the warrant it was shown that the officer omitted exculpatory information from the warrant application. The evidence had to be excluded because admitting it would harm the administration of justice.
After receiving a tip from the front desk staff at an apartment complex, the police executed a search warrant of the client’s residence. A large quantity of packaged marijuana was located.
Staff at an apartment complex contacted police about an odor of marijuana. Police attended the client’s apartment and immediately arrested the client. They then searched the apartment incident to the arrest and located a large amount of packaged marijuana. The police then obtained a search warrant and returned to seize the marijuana.
The initial search of the apartment was unlawful. The arrest was unlawful and without a warrant. The police did not follow proper procedure in obtaining a search warrant.
Client arrested following the complaint made by a sex trade worker.
Following a disagreement over the price for services, the sex trade worker complainant calls the Vancouver Police and alleges that she was assaulted and kept against her will in the client’s truck. He is arrested just a few blocks from the scene.
The circumstances indicate that the complainant’s version of event is too unlikely to be accepted. It is more probable that she attempted to use the police to extract revenge following a disagreement on the quality and the price of sexual services.
Accused client charged with assault of a parking lot attendant.
Accused client arrested following an altercation with a parking lot enforcement attendant. While the client was paying to park his vehicle, a parking lot enforcement attendant placed a violation ticket on his windshield. An altercation ensued and the client was alleged to have pushed, kicked and knocked down the attendant. Three Crown witnesses claimed to have seen the altercation.
The evidence creates a reasonable doubt as to whether the accused committed the offense. The accused may be telling the truth, therefore he must be acquitted.
Accused charged with cultivating marijuana and possession of marijuana for the purpose of trafficking following the bust of a grow op.
Accused client charged after Burnaby police execute a search warrant of 2 rented suites in a condominium, one directly above the other. A marijuana grow operation is found in the lower suite. The owners of the lower suite testify that the resident of the upper suite, the client, rented the lower suite and ultimately set up and ran the grow op. The upper suite is found to contain grow equipment, scales, “High Times” magazines, and grow charts. The accused did not testify.
The evidence may lead to alternative inferences; therefore knowledge and control are not proven beyond a reasonable doubt. ACQUITTED ON ALL CHARGES
Accused charged with uttering a threat to his ex-wife.
During the course of a telephone conversation with his former spouse concerning custody and access to the children, the husband was alleged to have threatened to kill his ex-wife. A trial was conducted. The prosecution presented the ex-wife and her new boyfriend as witnesses. The accused did not testify.
Following cross-examination by Mr. Doroshenko, the evidence of the complainant cannot be relied on to found a criminal conviction. The complainant has lied in the past and her evidence is not reliable. It is possible that the accused committed the offense, and possible that his behavior has been reprehensible as described by the complainant. Nevertheless, the case has not been proven beyond a reasonable doubt. ACQUITTAL
Accused charged with possession of marihuana for the purposes of trafficking following a bust of a house containing over 2100 plants and harvested marihuana.
Client arrested in an extravagant home in West Vancouver which contained the largest marihuana grow op ever busted on the North Shore. As the admitted caretaker of the grow op, the client pleaded guilty to possession of marijuana for the purpose of trafficking. Over 2100 plants were located, as well as 320 lbs. of harvested bud for a total value of between $1.4 and 1.8 million.
On sentencing the prosecutor sought a significant jail sentence served in a BC Corrections facility. Paul Doroshenko argued that a conditional sentence of house arrest was appropriate.
The accused would not pose a risk to the community by serving his sentence via house arrest.
“Mr. Doroshenko in eloquent submissions referred to quantum physics and recent works of fiction to punctuate an assertion that complex events may lead a person to find themselves in a situation they did not set out to get into. In hindsight, one can see how they got there, but it could not necessarily be predicted either that it would have happened or that it will dictate where they will go from here. The past is not necessarily a predictor of the future. Based upon the sequence of events experienced by [the accused] in recent years, Mr. Doroshenko submits that the offense is out of character.”
“The suggestion by Mr. Doroshenko that [the accused] may have been set up in the residence to assume the risk and take the fall is not unreasonable in the circumstances as related in court.”
A conditional sentence of house arrest for 18 months ordered despite the magnitude of the grow operation. Reported in the North Shore News, April 23, 2006.
Client charged with assault of his estranged wife.
Vancouver Police responded to a 911 call made by the wife of the client. Both acknowledged that the marriage is over as the client was having an affair and intended to live with his girlfriend. The complainant alleged that the client put his knee on her back and choked her. She complained of ongoing medical and psychological problems as a result of the alleged assault.
The credibility of the complainant is shattered following cross-examination by Mr. Doroshenko. The complainant is jealous and vindictive and her evidence cannot be trusted. She omits facts not favorable to her story and denies obvious truths. In light of the complainant’s demonstrably unreliable evidence and the accused denial, the accused is found not guilty.
Client charged with assault of his former common law wife.
Surrey RCMP attend after the client’s former common law wife calls 911. She alleges that he held her by the collar while pointing a large chef’s knife at her face. The couple were in the course of a dispute concerning the custody of their child.
Following cross examination of the complainant by Mr. Doroshenko, it is clear that the report is made shortly after the complainant was served family court papers seeking full custody of the child. The conduct of the complainant after the incident calls into question her behavior as a whole. Given these weaknesses in the complaint’s evidence and the accused credible denial, the accused is found not guilty.
Client charged with dangerous Operation of a Motor Vehicle and evading the police by failing to stop for them while in pursuit.
Vancouver police conduct a high speed pursuit of an SUV as it travels through East Vancouver and Gastown. Eventually the SUV collides with the iron posts in front of Vancouver’s famous Steam Clock before a police cruiser pins the vehicle against the clock. The SUV driver manages to pull away, fleeing down Cambie Street before police break off the pursuit. The client is later arrested and charged with two Criminal Code offenses.
By protecting the Client early in the investigation, police fail to obtain sufficient evidence to prove beyond a reasonable doubt the Client was at the wheel. During the course of the prosecution, the defense lawyer identifies evidence the police failed to obtain, and is later subsequently unavailable. PLEA TO NON-CRIMINAL CARELESS DRIVING
The client was arrested and charged for attempting to defraud with a phony cheque.
At a private cheque-cashing company the client, a former corrections officer, attempted to negotiate a fake cheque while wearing the corrections uniform. The teller identified the client who then was arrested and charged with three Criminal Code offenses.
The evidence was insufficient to conclude that the accused knew the cheque was not genuine. Mr. Doroshenko’s cross-examination of the teller demonstrated that his evidence was not reliable. The accused testified that he was wearing the uniform to take photos of himself to show his grandparents. The case has not been proven beyond a reasonable doubt. ACQUITTAL
Following a 911 call, client was arrested and charged with assaulting his girlfriend.
In 1999 Richmond RCMP charged Mr. Doroshenko’s first client with spousal assault after his girlfriend called 911 to report that he had punched and choked her.
Following Mr. Doroshenko’s cross-examination of the complainant, it is clear that the she was drunk when the fight took place. Indeed, under cross examination she eventually admitted to consuming 12 beers before the altercation. The court is not in the business of adjudicating fights between drunk people. NOT GUILTY
