Cake Criminal Defence

Cake Criminal Defence Nick Cake spent the first part of his career as a Crown Attorney and, after leaving in 2015, he focu

05/09/2023

Bicycles ARE vehicles as defined under the Highway Traffic Act. You can get a careless driving charge on a 🚲.

04/25/2023

Can I get an impaired on a bike 🚲? No, but you can on a ✈️🚘🛵🚌🚞🛶🚤⛵️

02/24/2023

Grandparent scams are on the rise. Here are some tips to avoid victimization. Share this to help out others!

It’s Toy Drive time. We teamed up with with our friends London's Best Rock FM96 , Country 104 , 1031 Fresh Radio , 980 ...
12/05/2022

It’s Toy Drive time. We teamed up with with our friends London's Best Rock FM96 , Country 104 , 1031 Fresh Radio , 980 CFPL News and the rest of the Chorus Radio team to help the Salvation Army make Christmas great again. Any help that you could give would be amazing. Slide into our DM’s and we’ll let you know where you can drop things off and how you can help. Anything you can give would be awesome. Toys, gift cards!! December 8th! Merry Christmas and Happy Holidays.

Scared to Death of Scaring to DeathI know there are a lot of people who enjoy a good scare on Halloween but, as you put ...
11/01/2022

Scared to Death of Scaring to Death

I know there are a lot of people who enjoy a good scare on Halloween but, as you put on your ghoulish mask or gory makeup, take note that you could frighten your way right into a jail cell.

It is illegal to scare someone to death. Section 222 of the Criminal Code opens the door for either a murder or manslaughter charge when one person causes the death of a child or sick person by wilfully frightening them to death. This isn’t just reserved for the scary holidays like Easter (come on, that huge walking bunny doesn’t seem super scary to anyone else?) or Halloween. Frightening can take many forms, from crazed fake chainsaw-wielding teens at the local Halloween corn maze, to jumping out of fake mailboxes or garbage cans for the latest YouTube prank. If you are wilfully trying to scare someone and that someone has a pacemaker or a predisposition completely unbeknownst to you, the results of your actions could lead to criminal charges. You are assumed to “take your victim as you find them” meaning that you don’t have to know about their weak heart or other health factors that may make them more susceptible to being scared to death.

Cases on frightening someone to death are few and far between and I imagine it is a rarely used section of the Criminal Code. The fact that it is on the books means that it can be used against you. There is no doubt that, should a charge like this be laid, the trial would be a complicated one given the various elements of the offence that the Crown would need to prove beyond a reasonable doubt. It would no doubt be an interesting one and so if you or anyone you know has ever been charged with scaring someone to death, the team at CCD Law is here to help. Call us for this or any other criminal offence, we defend!

Impaired Operation of an (Inflatable) Unicorn?You don’t need to be operating something with a motor to get an impaired d...
08/03/2022

Impaired Operation of an (Inflatable) Unicorn?

You don’t need to be operating something with a motor to get an impaired driving charge. I get asked all the time if you can get an impaired on a pedal bike and my answer remains “no” but the same can’t be said for a pedal boat. Be careful when it comes to watercraft and alcohol, you can get an impaired driving charge on a pool noodle.

While scrolling through Instagram this past weekend, I saw an ad from my favourite local craft seltzer company. It was a drone shot of some people who looked like they were having a good time. They were in a big inflatable tube with a big “bubba” style keg of seltzer in the middle. Red cups were being filled and as the drone flies out everyone is drinking. Looks like fun, but it is completely illegal. That big inflatable tube is considered a vessel, a vessel is considered a conveyance, and the criminal law in Canada says that it is illegal to be impaired while operating a conveyance. This point was made crystal clear very recently by our Court of Appeal in a case called Sillars. The Sillars decision upheld a trial level decision, a conviction for impaired operation (of a canoe) causing death. The reality is that you cannot be impaired and operate any type of vessel. A vessel is anything capable of navigating water. That means that you can get an impaired in a motorboat on the lake, a pedal boat on the pond, an innertube on the river, or even a pool noodle in the backyard pool. In the ad I saw, it appeared that the big inflatable tube was tied to the dock but remember that impaired operation also includes care and control. When it comes to vehicles like cars, trucks, vans, and such you don’t have to be driving to get the charge. The same can be said for docked or anchored vessels.

If you are charged with impaired operation of a vessel, you are subject to the same administrative penalties as you would be if you were charged on the roadway. This means you will lose your license to drive a vehicle if convicted. You will, at a minimum, face a fine and get a criminal record. The Court of Appeal was clear on the need to control vessels on our waterways and now I hope it is clear what you can and cannot operate after consuming alcohol. If you or anyone you know is charged with an impaired operation offence, car, truck, airplane, or big inflatable unicorn, call Cake Criminal Defence. We defend! Call Nick and the team today at 519-452-2621.

Officer, I'd Like to Phone a FriendIf you are arrested or even detained by the police, you need to call a lawyer. It is ...
07/28/2022

Officer, I'd Like to Phone a Friend

If you are arrested or even detained by the police, you need to call a lawyer. It is your right and it is imperative that you exercise that right. Don’t know the name of the lawyer? That’s okay, you can phone someone else to help you out. You don’t just get one phone call.

The Supreme Court of Canada affirmed an Ontario Court of Appeal decision earlier this month that overturned a previous trial court’s decision where that trial court failed to exclude a statement given to police by the accused during a murder investigation. During an interrogation, there are things the police can do and things they cannot do. They can lie to you. It is for this reason that, before talking to the police, the importance of speaking to a lawyer cannot be overstated. A lawyer can be your lifeline. Like Who Wants To Be A Millionaire, you have the right to phone a friend if that friend can assist with finding a lawyer. If you have forgotten my name, hopefully your friend hasn’t. The police must provide you the opportunity to diligently access your lawyer’s contact information. You get more than one phone call. Situations can arise allowing for another phone call to the lawyer despite having already spoken to them. There are times when your right to counsel is not satisfied simply because you have already spoken to one.

The police are expected to play by the rules of the game, but it cannot be assumed that they will. Further, it cannot be assumed that everyone arrested will know all the rules of the game they are now playing. Having access to a lawyer is critical to understanding what you ought to do and what you ought not to do. While it’s best to save my number in your cell phone, if you forget it you have the right to call someone who can help you get it. It is 519-381-5298 and is available at www.cakecriminaldefence.com. When you are detained or arrested by the police it is the only number that you need. Call the team at CCD Law. We defend!

Or a drug, or both could be bogusIf you end up pleading guilty, ensure that you only plead guilty to something that you ...
06/22/2022

Or a drug, or both could be bogus

If you end up pleading guilty, ensure that you only plead guilty to something that you are actually guilty of. The consequences of not paying attention to the details could lead to consequences that were originally unintended. This is perfectly illustrated by the somewhat new wording of the charge laid for impaired driving.

The new impaired driving section really isn’t that new anymore, having come into effect in December of 2018. When it became law, it changed the nature of impaired driving. The new wording added the words “impaired to any degree by alcohol, or a drug, or both”. I have made it my practice to ask the Judge to amend the wording of the charge, both at a plea or at the start of a trial, to accurately reflect the nature of the anticipated evidence being called by the Crown. That is fancy lawyer talk meaning that I ask the Crown to remove those words because there is nothing in the facts that says that the client was impaired by anything but alcohol. It may seem pointless because, in the end, if the client is convicted, they are convicted of impaired driving however, the implications of being convicted for something that may have been related to drug impairment are huge. There is a mandatory license suspension that flows from a conviction for impaired driving. It is mandatory, everyone gets it. The province of Ontario does allow people convicted of alcohol impaired driving offences the opportunity to participate in the ignition interlock program which allows for the early return of the driver’s license prior to the expiration of the one year. There is no such program for people convicted of a drug-related impaired. If drugs are involved, then it is a one-year driving prohibition, an early license return is not possible.

It pays to pay attention to the details. If the court convicts on an impaired with the standard charge wording, then the government deems the driver to be convicted of an impaired by drug and the early interlock ignition program is not an option. Not paying attention to the details could be costly. Trust the team at Cake Criminal Defence to take care of the details, and get you back on the road as soon as possible. At CDD Law, we defend!

Drunkenness Still Won't Save YouI have heard a lot of talk about this recent Supreme Court decision and have wanted to s...
06/10/2022

Drunkenness Still Won't Save You

I have heard a lot of talk about this recent Supreme Court decision and have wanted to say something for a while but figured everyone was too busy watching the Oscar worthy performances in the Jonny Depp trial to give a hoot about what I had to say. Of course, I appreciate that some people may not give a hoot for other reasons as well. Nonetheless, my friends are talking about this so now I am too.

Recently, our Supreme Court released three decisions on the same day, all dealing with the defence of intoxication. The Court struck down the provision in the Criminal Code that barred self-induced extreme intoxication as a defense to certain crimes, including sexual assault. Contrary to what certain public interest groups are saying on social media, this does not mean that you are now allowed to get drunk and rape-y. Drunkenness does not excuse unwanted sexual contact. What the Supreme Court does allow is another route for an accused individual to provide a full answer and defence to the charge(s) against them. It allows an accused to take full advantage of the defences provided for in the Criminal Code.

What needs to be understood is that there is a rather large difference between drunkenness and extreme self-induced intoxication. The former is what you get after a Friday night softball game. The latter requires expert evidence to show automatism, the lack of control of oneself to the point where the individual in question is essentially “zombified”. The bar is high. That is not a challenge to head to the LCBO and stock up to see if that level of intoxication with death or at least passing out can be achieved but rather a tidbit of information to ground the reader in the reality of the situation. The use of this defence will be rare and even more rare will be it’s success. Just because the defence is available does not mean it will be successful. The Supreme Court decided to allow the defence because no accused ought to be denied an avenue of defence however, the availability of the defence does not guarantee that the road won’t be closed when you get to the end.

Eliminating the ban on the use of extreme intoxication as a defence to sexual assault will not silence the abused. This will not derail the runaway train that is the movement. This will not amplify the Depp verdict and shift the balance of power. Fun fact, in recent times the Supreme Court has ruled against the accused in the last 34 sexual assault cases straight. To some it would appear that the balance has already shifted.

If you have been charged with a criminal offence of any kind, the team at CCD Law is ready to apply the facts of your case to all available defences and fight the fight that needs to be fought. At Cake Criminal Defence, we defend! Call us today.

Cross examination is the key to a good defence. Today, it was vital leading to a on all counts.
06/08/2022

Cross examination is the key to a good defence. Today, it was vital leading to a on all counts.

The Most Illegal Legal Substance in OntarioEven though Ma*****na is legal and is in fact less controlled than the sale o...
04/01/2022

The Most Illegal Legal Substance in Ontario

Even though Ma*****na is legal and is in fact less controlled than the sale of other leading intoxicants such as beer, wine, and liquor, the Ontario Government still wants to fight the war on drugs despite allowing pot shops on every corner. Given that the Province of Ontario has become one of the largest drug dealers in the world, there is no doubt that they want to eliminate the competition, be it legitimate homegrown or illegal street-bought (old school) w**d. To do so, the government has implemented some questionable laws that far outreach any legitimate safety concern and are frankly, unconstitutional.

A perfect example of this is section 12 of the Cannabis Control Act of Ontario. This law allows the police to search any vehicle or boat at any time without a warrant if it is reasonably believed that cannabis is being illegally stored in the vehicle or boat. Illegal storage would include any pot that is not in its original (read “government-controlled”) packaging or otherwise fastened closed and not readily available to any person in the vehicle or boat. If the officer has reasonable grounds to believe that the w**d in the vehicle or boat does not comply with the exceptions of section 12, then not only can they search the vehicle or boat, they can search any person found within it. This is crazy and way beyond the scope of public safety. It gives the officer carte blanche to identify and search people completely unrelated to the operation of the vehicle, simply because they are in the vehicle. It allows officers to do something that they would otherwise not be allowed to do. The police can’t search your vehicle if you simply run a stop sign. The police can’t ask the passengers in the vehicle for ID without reasonable grounds that an offence is being committed simply because the driver failed to signal for a left-hand turn. The Charter protects against such arbitrary searches or detentions. There is no reason that pot should be treated differently. An open case of beer on the rear seat with no evidence of consumption in the vehicle does not give police the right to search the vehicle and everyone in it. There is no reason why the police should be allowed to breach Charter standards simply because it is suspected there is improperly stored ma*****na inside the vehicle.

There is no doubt that all citizens have the right to be protected on our streets. Impaired driving in all its forms is something that we all have a vested interest in reducing. There must be a line between the need to keep society safe from others while on the streets, and the need to keep society safe from the over intrusion of the state while on those same streets. The rules surrounding cannabis ought to be no different than the rules surrounding alcohol and, in this case, the government has gone too far and put all of our civil liberties in jeopardy. If you or anyone you know has been subject to ma*****na charges, call the team at Cake Criminal Defence today. We have the knowledge and the abilities to fight for your rights. CCD Law is here to help. We defend.

Ontario Makes After Hours Work IllegalFriday nights, the neighbours and I like to gather in the garage to have a few bee...
03/23/2022

Ontario Makes After Hours Work Illegal

Friday nights, the neighbours and I like to gather in the garage to have a few beers and tell a few stories. More often than not, at least one conversation starts with “Hey Cake, you’re a lawyer can you tell me…” The inquiry this week came from a buddy who was on his phone for the whole first half of the evening. It was late, the kids were all in bed, and the street lights were on. He was taking calls and sending emails between sips, but it didn’t look like he was having a good time. The question, “Is it illegal for my boss to keep at me even after I have punched out for the day?” I didn’t know the answer but had a few cold OV left and figured I could come up with something before the night was done.

The answer is yes, almost, maybe, depending on the size of the employer you work for. The relationship between the employer and the employee is governed by multiple sets of rules and regulations. One of those sets is the Employment Standards Act. The ESA is a regulatory act, much like the Highway Traffic Act, or the Liquor License and Control Act. The ESA is enforced by the Ministry of Labour, Training and Skills Development. Late in 2021, the Government of Ontario amended the ESA, which now requires employees to have a “disconnect from work” policy. The policy must be written and shared with the employees by June of this year. The ESA describes “disconnecting from work” as engaging in work-related communications, emails, voice and video calls. Essentially “disconnecting from work” can be defined as “being free from the performance of work”. There are exempted industries but the bottom line is it looks like requiring employees to answer emails after hours could lead to enforcement action.

What that all means is still undecided as enforcement of these policies has not come into play yet. Interpretation of the wording of the policies will be key to determining if an employer is in violation. Violating the ESA will not lead to a criminal record, but could lead to fines, probation, or even jail time. While technology and the evolving global nature of business have made employers far more connected to employees than ever before, I wonder what folks like Musk, Bezos, O’Leary, or Wolfe Herd would say to putting the work away at 5 pm and not picking it up again until the start of business at 9 am the next day. It will also pose some interesting questions relating to the balance between an employee’s right to “disconnect” and the employer’s right to further the interests of the business venture. Once the enforcement team rolls in, I look forward to litigating these types of cases.

If you are an employer who falls victim to this industry-paralyzing legislation, call the team at CCD Law. We will be happy to defend your right to advance your interests while contributing to the economic security of our province.

Address

London, ON

Opening Hours

Monday 9am - 5pm
Tuesday 9am - 5pm
Wednesday 9am - 5pm
Thursday 9am - 5pm
Friday 9am - 5pm

Telephone

+15194522621

Website

Alerts

Be the first to know and let us send you an email when Cake Criminal Defence posts news and promotions. Your email address will not be used for any other purpose, and you can unsubscribe at any time.

Contact The Practice

Send a message to Cake Criminal Defence:

Shortcuts

Share