Successes:

Mr. Khan has won numerous cases as defense lawyer and articled in the local newspapers in the North on many occasions.  Although it is not possible to elaborate each and every case won, a few success stories have been outlined below as examples and testimonial for his accomplishments as a seasoned lawyer.

Criminal:

Assault of Police Officer:

Client was charged with assaulting a police officer. At the trial, three police officers testified. Mr. Khan cross-examined and brought out evidence of conflicting versions of events provided by each police officer. Defence took the stand and provided a thorough and convincing testimony. Court dismissed the charge of assault against the police officer. 

Drug Trafficking and Possession:

A 16 year old client was charged with trafficking in drugs. Police officer approached the client in a shopping mall and questioned him without giving him his constitutional rights. Client's response on the spot led to the admission of his guilt to the police officer. Mr. Khan determined that the client's Charter rights were violated and the matter was set for trial. The defence filed a Charter motion before the trial. Subsequently, the crown withdrew the charge.

Client was charged with possession of marijuana. Client was located by police in a park smoking a cigarette and was arrested. The matter was set down for trial and defense established that client was arrested without being given constitutional rights.  Crown subsequently withdrew the charge.

Driving Under Influence (DUI):

Client was charged with driving while intoxicated. Review of Crown disclosure showed that the breathalyser machine used by the police had expired. Crown subsequently withdrew the charge.

Assault Causing Bodily Harm:

Client was charged with assault of a fellow inmate at a prison. At trial, several witnesses testified. The complainant was cross examined extensively by the defence. The complainant’s version of assault was that the client punched him in the face across a 10 feet table. Defense proved that it was physically impossible for the assault to have taken place in those circumstances. The court found that the crown had failed to prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt. The client was acquitted of charge of assault after the trial.  

Client was charged with assault causing bodily harm. If convicted, the Crown was asking for 15 months in prison. The complainant and several witnesses testified at the trial. The defense raised doubts about how the complainant received the physical injuries and whether the physical injuries were self-inflicted because of alcohol consumption. During submission at the end of trial, the defense case raised serious doubts about the credibility and reliability of crown witnesses. The court tossed out the case resulting in a full acquittal.

Client was charged with hitting the complainant with a beer mug. At trial, the complainant and her husband testified. The defence established evidence that the client did not have any motive to hit the complainant. The complainant admitted upon cross-examination to being highly intoxicated on the night in question. Further, the defence pointed out to the Court that the testimony of the complainant and her did not match. The client was being set free of all charges.

Female client was charged with multiple assaults on the same individual. The client admitted to the offences and guilty pleas were entered. The defense submitted extensive materials at the sentencing hearing. The court granted the client conditional discharge because of her young age and excellent prospect for a nursing career.

Female client was charged with assault on another female complainant. The parties were drinking on the night in question. The complainant alleged that the client punched her in the face outside. However, at cross-examination, the complainant gave inconsistent version as to what had taken place. On the other hand, the defence provided a very credible and consistent testimony. Court found that the Crown failed to prove the case beyond a reasonable doubt and the case was dismissed.

Domestic Assault and Violence:

Client was charged with assaulting his wife. At trial, the wife was skilfully cross examined which resulted in her providing conflicting evidence. The wife alleged that she was hit with a plate but admitted to being intoxicated and not remembering her actions immediately after the assault. The client was acquitted of spousal assault charge after the trial.

Client was charged with harassment of a separated husband. Extensive cross-examination conducted by defence at the trial resulted in the complainant providing conflicting evidence. On the other hand, the defence provided a very credible testimony to the court. The court found that there was insufficient evidence and tossed the charges.

Sexual Offence:

Client was charged with sexually assaulting an elderly woman. The defense elected trial by judge and jury and the matter was set down for preliminary inquiry. At the preliminary inquiry, the complainant testified. The complainant’s testimony failed to satisfy any of the elements of sexual assault. The charges were dismissed by the court.

Jury Trial:

Young client in his 20's was charged with sexual assault. At the jury trial, the complainant was cross- examined for 5 hours by the defense. Defense brought out evidence which showed alcohol and drug consumption seriously compromised the client’s memory. Client chose not to testify during the trial. The jury was unable to reach a verdict resulting in a hung jury.

Regulatory offence:

The client is a highly successful business man owning multiple businesses and restaurants. The client was charged with violation of specific provisions of the Liquor Act. The matter was set down for a contested hearing. The client was charged with serving intoxicated patrons at his restaurant. At the hearing before a panel of the Liquor Control Board, the city by-law enforcement officer and the police officer testified that the patrons were intoxicated.  At cross examination, however, both the police officer and the by-law enforcement officer admitted that there was insufficient evidence to support intoxication of the patrons. The hearing panel concluded that there was insufficient evidence to support the intoxication of the patrons and the charges were dismissed. This was one of the very few Liquor Act violation cases which was won in the Northwest Territories.   

Immigration:

Mr. Khan has an extremely high rate of success in almost all immigration matters. A few cases are elaborated below:

Client was an international student in Canada who wanted to apply for Canadian immigration under the Federal Skilled Worker Class. After initial assessment, the client was found to have a total point short of the required minimum 67 points. Mr. Khan requested substituted evaluation for his client and filed extensive materials and lengthy written submissions. The application was approved and the client became a permanent resident of Canada in a very short period of time. 

Client was from Philippines and working in Canada as a live-in care giver. In the past, her application for permanent residence under the Live-in Caregiver was refused as she did not meet the eligibility criteria. An application was filed in Canada under the Spouse and Common-law Partner Class in Canada. The application was approved and finalized within a short period of time.