Toronto Criminal Lawyers Blog

Our clients are often concerned about the effect a criminal conviction could have on their ability to travel to the United States. If you are convicted of a criminal offence in Canada, that conviction could have repercussions on any future plans to enter the United States. The US has strict entrance laws for foreign visitors with criminal records.

Under American law, foreigners may be denied entrance to the United States if they are deemed to be “inadmissible” by the Bureau of Customs and Border Protection. There are three categories of criminal behaviour that render an individual inadmissible.

Categories of Inadmissibility

• Drugs The most common reason Canadians are denied entry to the United States is a prior drug-related conviction. Any violation relating to a controlled substance (even simple possession of marijuana) can be grounds for denying a foreigner entry to the US.
• Crimes Involving Moral Turpitude The term “crimes involving moral turpitude” (CIMTs) refers to a large category of offences which are considered to be contrary to community standards or community morals. Though there is no definitive list of CIMTs, decades of immigration cases have led to the evolution of a non-exhaustive list of crimes which are always considered CIMTs. Some examples are fraud, arson, blackmail, burglary, embezzlement, theft, counterfeiting, perjury, kidnapping, manslaughter, murder, prostitution, and rape. Simple assault or assault with a weapon are not CIMTs. However, assault with intent to kill, rape, commit a robbery, or cause serious bodily harm is a CIMT as is assault with a dangerous weapon. For a good list of crimes that are CIMTs see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moral_turpitude.
• Multiple Criminal Convictions If you have been convicted of two or more criminal offences you may be denied entry into the United States. This rule encompasses any type of offence regardless of whether it is a CIMT. The only exception to this rule is for political offences. Political offences are offences which an individual commits for a political purpose. Following the decision in Dunlayici, an offence only qualifies as a political offence if it is directed against the government and forms a part of an on-going or contemplated political struggle. This exception also tends to be limited to political offences which do not involve the use of violence.

These categories are so comprehensive that, in practice, almost any Canadian with a criminal record is likely ineligible for entry to the United States.

Convictions

A conviction for one of the offences listed above has the ability to render an individual inadmissible to the United States. However, U.S. law uses a very broad definition of the term conviction. U.S. law recognizes that an absolute discharge from a Canadian criminal court does not qualify as a conviction for immigration purposes. However, a Canadian conditional discharge is considered a conviction for US immigration purposes. This means that if you were charged with a criminal offence which falls into one of the categories of inadmissibility and you were granted a conditional discharge you are likely ineligible for entry into the United States. A conviction from a Canadian criminal court likewise qualifies as a conviction under U.S. immigration law and leads to inadmissibility.

Furthermore, under US immigration law, even if you are acquitted at trial or the charges against you are stayed, you may still be deemed inadmissible to the U.S.. This can happen in two different ways. First, if you admit to committing a crime but you are nonetheless acquitted by a Canadian court that acquittal is a deemed conviction for US immigration purposes. This could happen, for example, if you admitted to committing a crime at trial but were acquitted based on a successful claim under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. The second way you may be deemed inadmissible, regardless of having been acquitted by a Canadian court, is if you admitted at trial to committing acts which constitute the essential elements of an offence. An acquittal (where you do not admit committing a crime or committing certain acts which constitute all the essential elements of a crime) does not render you inadmissible to the U.S.

Criminal Behaviour

There are some types of criminal behaviour which can render an individual inadmissible even if they have never been convicted of a crime. This occurs when an Immigration Officer knows or has reason to suspect that an individual has engaged in two specific types of criminal behaviour.

• Controlled Substance Trafficking If an immigration officer knows or has reason to believe an individual is or has been trafficking in a controlled substance that person may be excluded under U.S. immigration law. This rule also applies to individuals who assist, abet, conspire or collude with others to engage in trafficking.
• Prostitution and Commercial Vice If an immigration officer knows or has reason to believe that an individual is coming to the United States to engage in prostitution that person can be excluded. This rule also excludes individuals who have engaged in prostitution within the last 10 years. Individuals who attempt to procure or import prostitutes or who receive profits from prostitution (“pimps”) are also deemed inadmissible by this rule. Finally, this rule excludes individuals who an Immigration Officer believes to be traveling to the United States to purchase the services of a prostitute (“johns”).

Exceptions

There are a number of exceptions to the laws which govern this type of inadmissibility. For example, a Canadian conviction which, had it been committed in the U.S., would have been treated as an act of juvenile delinquency under U.S. federal guidelines will not count as a conviction for U.S. immigration purposes. This means that if you are convicted of a crime committed before your eighteenth birthday you likely will not be deemed inadmissible to the United States. There are also some circumstances where a single conviction for a CIMT will be overlooked for immigration purposes. If you have committed a crime and want more information on your eligibility to enter the United States visit the Bureau of Customs and Border Protection website at: http://www.cbp.gov/ or contact a local immigration lawyer.

Pardons

If you have a criminal record which renders you ineligible for entry into the United States, you may be able to enter the U.S. if you obtain an entry waiver or a criminal pardon in Canada. If you are pardoned in Canada, the offence will not appear on your record when you attempt to enter the United States. If however, you have made an unsuccessful attempt to enter the United States, the offence will already be on record with the Bureau of Customs and Border Protection, and you may have to obtain an entry waiver to enter the US.

The best way to make sure you are able to enter the United States is to avoid a criminal conviction. If you are facing criminal charges be sure to contact Kostman & Pyzer, Barristers, to ensure that a criminal accusation does not become an impediment to your ability to travel.

One of the first questions a client asks whcn charged with Domestic Assault is if there is any way that they could “get” a Peace Bond. Of course, in most  cases of domestic assault the Peace Bond is a happy ending. The charge is withdrawn. The accused avoids a criminal record. Life returns to normal. In some cases the parties have reconciled. Often, the relationships that gave rise to the allegations, cannot survive the test of bail orders restricting contact and the fact that the complainant made the accusation to the police.

The reality in the present criminal justice system is that Peace Bonds are very hard to obtain in the context of a domestic assault allegation. In some jurisdictions, it is almost impossible to obtain a Peace Bond prior to a trial date. On the trial date, where the prosecutor is of the view that the evidence in support of the allegation is not strong enough for a Court to convict, the client may be offered a Peace Bond. The nastier the allegation, the more likely that the prosecutor is going to let the Court make the call rather that be critized later if the Peace Bond creates a controversy.

Generally speaking, given the current political landscape of the offence of Domestic Assault, a Peace Bond is only available in the most minor cases. Threats of violence without any violence, or history of violence, may qualify,. This is  especially true if the allegation is of a he said she said nature, and unsupported by corroborative evidence. In these cases, the prosecution is aware of the fact that a conviction is unlikely.

A Peace Bond may also be available if the nonconsensual touching is viewed as very minor, and there is no history of violence between the parties. A push. Sometimes a slap. The fact that the accused has some indication of bruising can also be a factor which may influence a prosecutor to exercise their discretion to agree to a Peace Bond. The accused’s bruises would advance his defence that the complainant was the aggressor and he was acting in self-defence.

Most courthouses in the Greater Toronto area have one or two domestic assault court days wherein those individuals charged with domestic assault related offences, appear. In the current prevailing politic individuals charged with domestic assaul are generally offered a quick exit from the justice system. Where there is no history of domestic violence,and so long as there is no significant injury to the complainant, the average accused person is offered a conditional discharge (a guilty plea which is not technically a criminal record). The bail is varied to allow the parties to reconcile (with the complainant’s written consent). After the person completes the four month one night per week Partner Assault Response Spousal programme (anger management in a spousal context), they are placed on Probation.

At Kostman and Pyzer, Barristers, we are well informed, experienced, and familiar with the politic underlying Domestic Assault prosecution policies.  We can’t promise you a Peace Bond, but we can advance a strong argument that one should be available in the particular circumstances of your case.

Sometimes when an individual is charged with a crime, he or she will be detained in custody pending a bail hearing. At the bail hearing, the Crown Attorney must “show cause” – i.e., show the court why the accused should be kept in custody until his or her trial. If the Crown cannot satisfy a judge that there is cause to keep the accused in custody, he or she will be released into the community on bail while awaiting trial. The Crown can show cause that the accused should be detained only by establishing one of the following grounds:

1. That the accused is likely to fail to appear in court or flee the jurisdiction;

2. That the accused must be detained in order to protect the public; and/or

3. That the accused must be detained to maintain public confidence in the administration of justice.

Criminal defence lawyers and other legal professionals generally refer to the third ground as the tertiary ground.

The tertiary ground may be invoked by a Court to deny bail where public confidence in the judicial system would be damaged if the accused is released. It is generally accepted that a judge should only deny bail on the basis of the tertiary ground alone in exceptional cases involving heinous offences. For example, denying bail based on the tertiary ground was upheld by the Supreme Court of Canada in R. v. Hall, where the deceased was brutally murdered and almost decapitated. However, it is very important that the tertiary ground is not misused by judges caving to irrational public fears.

There are several factors a judge must consider before denying bail based on the tertiary ground. These include (a) the importance of the presumption of innocence, (b) the significance of the accused’s right to liberty and the constitutional right to bail, (c) the granting of bail must be considered on a case-by-case basis and there are no offences for which bail is automatically granted or prohibited, (d) the actual nature of the allegations and the fact that the allegations may or may not be proven at trial, (e) pre-trial custody can last for many months and can be a significant hardship on the accused and his or her family members,  and can complicate the accused’s ability to prepare their defence (f) the bail process should not be used to punish the accused before trial.

Canadian courts have refused to detain accused individuals solely on the basis of the tertiary ground even when they were accused with offences that most people would consider extremely disturbing. For example, the Court released a man accused of beating a robbery victim to death despite the Crown’s argument to detain him based on the tertiary ground, in R. v. Trout. In R. v. Ibrahim, the court released a man accused of deliberately beating a homeless person to death, based on the narrow interpretation of the tertiary ground. However, the court has used the tertiary ground to deny bail for extremely shocking or heinous offences, such as the brutal murder in Hall or the situation in R. v. White where a man was charged with the first-degree murder of his pregnant wife.

The decision to not detain an individual based on the tertiary ground alone requires that the court balance the shocking or egregious nature of the crime against the presumption of innocence and the accused’s Charter of Rights right to reasonable bail. Because of the emphasis on the presumption of innocence, the court is much more reluctant to apply the tertiary ground in situations where the evidence against the accused is weak. The court has indicated that in youth matters, the tertiary ground should be applied extremely rarely.

Recently, Toronto criminal defence lawyers have noticed that judges are more willing to apply the tertiary ground in situations involving guns and gang violence. This is partially explained by the increasing media attention and public awareness of gun and gang violence in the Greater Toronto Area.

In 1995, despite resistance on the part of criminal defence lawyers and civil rights activists, Bill C-18 was passed, which amended the Criminal Code to create a regime for collecting DNA samples from convicted offenders. Many criminal defence lawyers had argued that requiring offenders to submit bodily samples interfered with their bodily integrity and infringed their right to privacy. Nonetheless, the amendments to the Criminal Code were passed, giving courts the authority to order that offenders give a DNA sample. Samples are stored in a national databank created by the DNA Identification Act for use in investigating unsolved past crimes and future crimes. Under the new regime created by the DNA Identification Act, a judge can make a “DNA order” after convicting an offender of certain proscribed crimes. These orders are legally binding, and the offender must surrender a sample of his or her DNA. The Supreme Court of Canada has declared the DNA order regime constitutional in several cases.

For the purpose of issuing DNA orders, the Criminal Code distinguishes between two types of offences: primary offences and secondary offences. DNA orders may be issued for an individual convicted of a primary or secondary offence. In reality, the two categories cover almost every common offence in the Code.

Primary Designated Offences are listed in s. 487.04 of the Criminal Code. There are over 50 offences designated as primary offences. They are mostly of a violent or sexual nature, but also include especially serious offences such as hijacking, using explosives, endangering the safety of an aircraft, and participating in terrorist activities. If an individual is convicted of a primary offence, the judge must make a DNA order with respect to that person, unless the defendant and his or her criminal defence lawyer are able to satisfy the court that the impact on the defendant’s privacy and bodily integrity significantly outweighs the public interest in protecting society through the early detection, arrest and conviction of offenders. The burden on the accused is particularly high. The defence lawyer must show that the negative effect on the offender would be “grossly disproportionate” to the benefits for society. A DNA order may be avoided for a primary offence if the offence was extremely minor (for example, a sexual assault that consisted of touching another person’s leg or buttocks) and/or the defence can show that there is very little chance of the offender reoffending.

Secondary Designated Offences are also listed in s. 487.04 of the Criminal Code. They include all indictable offence under the Criminal Code for which the maximum sentence is five years or more, and all indictable offences under s. 5 (trafficking), s. 6 (importing and exporting narcotics), and s. 7 (production) of the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act punishable by a maximum sentence of five years or more. Section 487.04 also lists almost 20 additional secondary designated offences, including escaping from custody, assault, arson, criminal harassment or uttering threats. If an individual is found guilty of a secondary offence, the court can make a DNA order if it determines that it is in best interests of the administration of justice to do so.  Often, the Crown Attorney will request a DNA order and make submissions to the judge arguing in favor of the Order, and the accused’s criminal defence lawyer will make submissions against the making of the Order. The court will then weigh a number of factors, including the submissions of counsel, the nature and circumstances of the offence, the criminal record of the accused, and the impact of such a DNA order on the accused’s right to privacy and security of the person, to decide whether a DNA order is warranted.

One of the most controversial aspects of the DNA Order Regime is that it applies retrospectively. According to s. 487.052 of the Criminal Code, the Court may order that DNA samples be taken from certain offenders convicted of committing a crime before Bill C-18 came into force. Retrospective Orders are made by way of an ex parte (without notice to the offender) application. They can be made against an individual who is serving a prison sentence of at least two years on the date of the application, for murder, certain listed sexual offences, or manslaughter, They can also be made against an individuals serving a sentence of at least two years on the date of application who has been declared a “dangerous offender” under the Criminal Code. Generally speaking, as a matter of fairness, laws only apply to actions committed after a law comes into force. However, in R. v. Rodgers, the Supreme Court of Canada declared retrospective DNA orders constitutional.

DNA orders can be issued to young offenders (individuals between the ages of 12 and 17 tried under the Youth Criminal Justice Act). The same rules about primary and secondary offences apply to young offenders. However, in the case of R. v. R. C., the Supreme Court of Canada ruled that it is appropriate to consider the underlying principles and objectives of the Youth Criminal Justice Act when determining whether to a DNA order against a young offender for a primary offence.

DNA orders can also be made when an individual is found “not criminally responsible” by way of insanity or mental illness [NCR] for a designated primary or secondary offence, even though an NCR finding is not technically a finding of guilt. Moreover, when a judge looks at an offender’s criminal record to determine whether to issue of DNA order for a secondary offence, they may consider any previous NCR findings in making their assessment.

Facing criminal charges can be intimidating and stressful. One of the first obligations the court puts on an individual accused of a crime is to “retain counsel”. In other words, the court hopes that you will find a lawyer as soon as possible to help you with your case. We strongly encourage you avoid representing yourself (see our blog on “The Self-Representing Accused” for more information on the dangers of representing yourself at trial). However, we understand that choosing a lawyer can often seem like a daunting task. There are so many lawyers to choose from and there are so many factors to consider. Here is some advice on how to sort through all the information to choose the ideal lawyer for you.

The first thing to keep in mind is that if you are facing criminal charges you should be looking for a criminal defence lawyer. You may already have a lawyer who looks after your business, taxes, will or other matters. However, finding a lawyer is not like finding a family doctor — one lawyer cannot deal with all your legal problems. The type of lawyer you select should correspond to the problem you are facing. Though there are some lawyers who do not specialize in criminal law who will take criminal law cases, most lawyers only practice in one area of law. When you begin searching for a lawyer to represent you in your criminal charges, you can make your search much easier by limiting it to criminal defence lawyers from the outset. Moreover, it is in your best interest to select a lawyer whose focus is criminal law. Criminal charges can jeopardize your livelihood and liberty, so you want to make sure that the individual who represents you is an expert in criminal matters.

Once you have limited your search to criminal defence lawyers, you will notice that there are a lot of factors which differentiate between individual practitioners of criminal law. People wading through all the information on the different lawyers out there often choose to focus on factors such as age, what law school the lawyer attended, and what firm the lawyer works with. These factors are largely irrelevant. Some young lawyers have excellent success rates — far outshining older lawyers. Some of the best lawyers choose not to work in large firms and prefer to work as sole practitioners for lifestyle reasons that have nothing to do with their legal competence. Finally, excellent criminal defence lawyers, judges and legal scholars have graduated from every Canadian law school. At the end of the day, the most relevant factors when it comes to choosing a criminal defence lawyer are cost, personality and experience.

Your budget will be a major determinant of what lawyer you retain. However, this is not necessarily a bad thing. It is simply not the case that all the good lawyers are incredibly expensive. Moreover, some of the best lawyers in and around Toronto do a great deal of Legal Aid case work. If you do require Legal Aid, you should inquire at the Legal Aid Office closest to you about obtaining a list of lawyers in your area who take Legal Aid cases.

If you do not require Legal Aid, you must decide how much you are willing to pay for a lawyer. Remember that in some cases, a good criminal defence lawyer may be the most important investment you make in your life, as your criminal defence lawyer is the most significant person standing between you and a criminal record, large fine, conditional sentence and/or, most importantly, jail time. With that in mind, make a generous but realistic determination of what you can afford. Try asking yourself two questions: (1) “how much do I want to pay for a lawyer?” and (2) (depending on the type of charges you are facing) “how much can I pay to avoid going to jail?” or “how much can I pay to avoid having a criminal record?” or “how much can I pay to avoid these charges interfering with my ability to see my children on a regular basis?”. You should aim to find a criminal defence lawyer who charges somewhere between the answer to question (1) and the answer to question (2). Most lawyers will want to meet with you before they give you an estimate of how much your matter will cost. This is because they often have to hear the full story before they can estimate how much time and effort your matter will require. This method is in your best interest as well since the best way to learn important information about a potential criminal defence lawyer, most notably their personality, is to meet with the lawyer in person.

Personality is an important factor to consider when choosing a lawyer. You want someone who you feel comfortable with, as you will have to communicate with your lawyer consistently throughout the trial process. You also want someone who strikes you as being competent and trustworthy. Remember that this lawyer is going to be representing you in court, so if he or she doesn’t make a good first impression when you meet, he or she probably will not make a good first impression on a judge either. Other factors to look for are common sense (as your lawyer will be helping you make important life decisions) and discretion (as you will have to trust your lawyer with some of your most private personal information).

Finally, it is important to look to experience when choosing a criminal defence lawyer. By experience we do not necessarily mean age or even the total number of years the lawyer has been practicing. Rather, we mean the lawyer’s experience dealing with cases similar to your own. A lawyer who has been practicing for five years, but has accepted a high volume of weapons-related cases is far more useful to an individual facing a weapons charge than an individual practicing twenty years but taking mostly impaired driving cases. The lawyers at our offices, for example, specialize in drug-related charges, weapons-related charges, domestic assault charges, drinking and driving charges, theft charges and fraud charges. We also represent a lot of young offenders. If you have outstanding charges in any of these areas, or other similar areas, we invite you to contact our offices by calling 416-658-1818 to arrange a meeting with one of our lawyers.

The PARS Program — which stands for Partner Assault Response Services — is an important component of Ontario’s Domestic Violence prosecution strategy. It consists of a specialized counseling and educational service for those individuals who are found guilty of a domestic violence-related offence. Upon a finding of guilt, the individual will be referred to PARS either by the Domestic Violence co-ordinator or by the Probation and Parole office.

The PARS Program lasts sixteen weeks in total. During those sixteen weeks, participants learn about appropriate behaviour towards their partner and non-violent ways to deal with their anger. Participants are expected to attend the program for one hour each week. The program is available in both English and French, and translator services can be provided for most other languages.

In order to be eligible for the program, the offender must be at least 18 years old, must be referred by a courts or probation office and must agree to participate in the program. Participation in the PARS program is voluntary. However, Toronto courts will often give individuals charged with an offence an incentive to participate in PARS, by offering a reduced sentence or probation if the accused individual agrees to enter the program. In most cases, before an individual is eligible for PARS there must be a finding of guilt against them. In some cases, an individual may participate in the program on the understanding that upon successful completion, they will receive a Peace Bond. As criminal defence lawyers, we always strive to avoid a finding of guilt for our clients and urge them only to enter the PARS program if they understand that although an absolute or conditional discharge does not constitute a criminal record, it is a finding of guilt and will show up as such on CPIC the police database.

Those who live in the Toronto Area and want to learn more about the PARS program can attend an information session on the PARS Domestic Assault Program held at the 1000 Finch courthouse on Tuesdays at 1:00 p.m. in courtroom 303. You may also call 1-888-579-2888 (outside Greater Toronto Area) or 416-314-2447 (inside Greater Toronto Area) to get more information and find the PARS location nearest you.

In our experience as criminal defence lawyers, domestic assault charges are very common in Toronto courts. Individuals accused of domestic assault are often deprived of the support system usually provided by family either because of family discord or by the strict bail conditions routinely applied to those accused of domestic violence. Though these conditions are sometimes necessary to protect victims of domestic violence from retaliation by abusive partners, in other cases it is an unfortunate burden that an accused person must be separated from children, home and spouse as they await trial. Moreover, those facing these charges often find that the Toronto court system is very hard on those accused of domestic crimes. In the Toronto court system, the Crown has a zero tolerance policy when it comes to dealing with domestic assault charges. The trial process is further complicated by the special process the Toronto courts use to hear domestic matters. As criminal defence lawyers, we see first hand every day how complicated and discouraging this process can be for the thousands of men and women in the greater Toronto area accused of domestic violence each year.

What is Domestic Assault?

Domestic assault charges refer to charges which arise within the context of a domestic relationship. In other words, when an incident occurs between two or more individuals who are deemed by the Crown to be in a domestic relationship the resulting charges are labeled as domestic. A domestic relationship can be a relationship between a wife and husband (including commonlaw and same-sex partners), a girlfriend and boyfriend, children and parents (including step-children and adopted children), children and grandparents, or any other individuals who are related to one another.

Special Court Procedures

The Toronto court system segregates domestic matters from other types of charges. Domestic matters are all heard together on specific days at those courthouses which hear domestic cases. A court which hears domestic matters is referred to simply as “domestic court”. Courthouses which hold domestic court are listed below along with the dates, times, and courtrooms it takes place in:

• ¥ Old City Hall: Domestic Court every Monday and Wednesday at 2 PM in courtroom 114.
• ¥ College Park: Domestic Court every Friday at 10 AM and 2 PM in courtroom 505.
• ¥ 1000 Finch: Domestic Court every Monday and Wednesday at 9 AM in courtroom 301.
• ¥ 2201 Finch: Domestic Court every Mondays and Wednesday at 2 PM in courtroom 202
• ¥ Newmarket: Domestic Court every Tuesday at 9:30 AM in courtroom 102

The Crown Attorney in domestic court is often selected because he or she has a special interest in combating domestic violence. This usually means that he or she is an expert in this type of charge. It is highly recommended that an individual accused of a domestic crime retain criminal defence counsel as soon as possible to ensure that his or her rights are adequately represented in domestic court.

Special Programs

In many cases, the entire family is suffering because of the domestic charges. Often, it is everyone’s desire to put the charge behind them to restore the family unit. Because of the zero tolerance policy Toronto has adopted when it comes to domestic crimes, the complainant has no power or control over the proceedings once they have involved the police. For example, the complainant does not have any control over whether to press charges nor does he or she have the ability to stop the proceedings against the accused. Once the police are called the Crown and police will almost certainly press charges. The rationale for this attitude is to protect victims of domestic violence who attempt to withdraw charges out of fear for their own safety or the safety of their children. Unfortunately, in many cases these rules are detrimental to individuals who are forced into an artificial and prolonged separation due to an erroneous or minor charge of domestic violence.

In those situations involving minor charges such as an assault (not including an assault with a weapon, aggravated assault, or an assault which resulted in injury) where the accused has no criminal record, the Crown will often make an offer to the accused which would modify the accused’s bail to allow them to reunite with the complainant. In exchange the accused must plead guilty to the offence and undertake to attend a special counseling program. There are two such programs: PARS (Partner Assault Response Systems) and EIP (Early Intervention Program). These counseling programs typically run one hour a week for sixteen weeks. The program focuses on the nature of the domestic relationship and specific strategies for anger management in the context of a domestic relationship. At the end of the sixteen weeks, the program leader will prepare a report on the accused’s progress through the program. If the report is favourable, the Crown will likely agree to a request for a Conditional Discharge. A Conditional Discharge is a finding of guilt; however, it is not a criminal record. See our blog on Discharges for more information on this result. Though this option may sound appealing because it allows an accused person to reunite with their partner, it is important to remember that this does result in a finding of guilt being made against him or her by the court. We highly recommend that you consult with a lawyer before entering into either of these programs.

An information session on the PARS domestic assault program is held at the 1000 Finch courthouse on Tuesdays at 1 PM in courtroom 303.