June 7, 2007 edition of The Guelph Mercury, by Scott Tracey

“A medical marijuana crusader accused of mailing pot to fellow users in the United States and Britain pleaded guilty yesterday to committing mischief by using Canada Post services “without proper authority.”…

Outside court, Renda’s lawyer, Leora Shemesh, said the plea was carefully crafted to protect her client’s Health Canada licence, which allows Renda to possess and grow marijuana.” [Read more on how a criminal trial lawyer defended drug crimes charges.]

Criminal Trial Lawyer Successful In Defending Against Drug Crimes Charges

As diabetic patients are in need of insulin, medical marijuana users are also in dire need of their medication. Marijuana is known to combat fibromyalgia and post-traumatic stress disorder as well as epilepsy and arthritis. In Marco Renda’s case, in the article above, he needed marijuana as a means to treat hepatitis C.

However, due to criminal charges against him, he was threatened to have his one and only medication for his sickness legally taken away from him. Many patients are being threatened by similar drug crimes charges involving marijuana, which is completely unjust. Any criminal, from convicted murderers to rapists, would never have their insulin taken away from them if he or she was diabetic. Why then did Marco Renda, who was charged with attempting to deliver marijuana by post to fellow sick patients, have his basic human right to medication stripped away from him?

As Renda’s criminal trial lawyer, I have dedicated two years to this case, and committed myself to freeing Renda from such bogus and unfair punishment.

So if you are facing similar punishment by the Canadian government, call my Toronto office today at (416) 944-8111. I am a criminal lawyer experienced in trials relating to marijuana and other drug crimes, and I look forward to hearing about your case.

May 11, 2006 edition of The Guelph Mercury, by Scott Tracey

“When court began yesterday morning, Hearn called the two lawyers into his office and explained the conflict. He later explained in open court why he could not continue to hear Renda’s case…

Shemesh said she had no problem with Hearn continuing with the case, but understood why the judge felt he must remove himself.” [Read more on how a Toronto defence lawyer fights marijuana possession charges.]

Marijuana Possession Charges Are No Match For Skilled Defence Lawyer From Toronto

As stated in the article above, Marco Renda faced marijuana possession charges and admitted to mailing the drug to users around the globe. The judge overlooking the case, Justice Gary Hearn, stepped down from his duty and requested another judge oversee the case. This occurred when Hearn discovered that a letter supporting Renda’s case was written by a personal acquaintance of his. Justice Hearn did not feel this would affect his ability to make a fair decision, but was concerned more about the appearance of possible bias. Renda considered this to be a positive sign, since Hearn’s acknowledgment of someone who uses marijuana for medical purposes gives Renda’s case more legitimacy.

As an experienced defence lawyer in Toronto, I am well versed in many cases resulting from marijuana possession charges, and used my best judgment when I advised Renda to plead guilty to a lesser offence. This lesser offence has avoided further issues with Health Canada and allowed Renda to keep his federal exemption for medical marijuana use.

Call me today at (416) 944-8111 for a Toronto defence lawyer skilled at fighting marijuana possession charges.

February 23, 2006 edition of The Guelph Mercury, by Scott Tracey

“…members of the OPP Drug Enforcement Section executed a search warrant at Renda’s Southgate Township home. During the search police seized eight vials of hashish oil, valued at $2300, from the living room.

Defence counsel Leora Shemesh of Toronto said Renda admits “the elements of the offences” to which he pleaded guilty, but disputes the value of the drugs attached by the Crown.” [Read the entire article.]

Find A Criminal Lawyer In Ontario Who Is Well Versed In Proper Search Warrant Procedures

As a criminal lawyer in Ontario, I have witnessed countless cases where the amount attached to the value of drugs obtained during the execution of a search warrant has gone unchallenged, and the accused was sentenced unfairly. It is your right as a citizen to be protected from invalid and incompetent searches of your private property.

As the article states above, Renda’s estate was searched by police who seized eight vials of hashish oil, valued at $3,200, according to the police. My client, Renda, admits to marijuana possession, but the value of the drugs was simply incorrect. The value of the drugs and the amount seized by police was estimated exceedingly high. This incorrect information could have lead to a greater punishment for my client, which is why I vigilantly protested this inconsistency of information. As Renda’s criminal lawyer, I ordered an assessment of whether Renda would be qualified for a conditional sentence.

If you live in Ontario and need a criminal lawyer to challenge the value of the drugs obtained during the execution of a search warrant, contact me online or call my office today at (416) 944-8111.

Pot charges cleared by successful drug attorney

Tuesday, April 5, 2005 edition of The Toronto Sun, by Sam Pazzano

“[The judge] excluded all the evidence – including more than $400,000 worth of marijuana – seized in the search and tossed out the charges.

“The message is police can’t have shortcuts, violate people’s rights by conducting illegal searches,” said Kim’s lawyer, Leora Shemesh.” [Read the entire article on how a drug attorney cleared pot charges.]

Pot Charges Can Be Wiped Clean With The Aid Of A Drug Attorney.

When facing pot charges or any drug possession offense, a drug attorney by your side is crucial. Drug attorney’s are educated and equipped with the necessary skills required to attain the best results possible for anyone convicted of a drug related crime.

The outcome of many drug cases is determined by lawyer tactics in court and not solely based on a person’s charges. As an experienced drug attorney, I have extensive knowledge in the area of drug law. For this reason, favorable results for my clients have been achieved in numerous past cases. Pot charges ranging from simple possession to growing and manufacturing are tough to fight alone. Turning a potential drug conviction into a complete dismissal of your pot charges is possible with the help of my drug attorney services. The likelihood of generating similar results is greatly reduced without any form of aid.

Best practices are not always performed during the arrest and seizure of drugs. It is important to understand your rights as well as the rules and regulations of the court. As a drug attorney, I can prove and defend any wrongdoings occurred during the process of the arrest and use it to support your cause.

If you have recently been arrested on pot charges, let us put together a winning case. Contact me, online or call (416) 944-8111, if you require additional information.

April 5, 2005 edition of The Toronto Star, by Tracy Huffman

“Defence lawyers have been winning a number of cases involving accused grow operators because judges are ruling that search warrants are invalid…

Kim’s lawyer, Leora Shemesh argued that police violated her client’s Charter rights by entering the Highview Rd. home in Pickering without a warrant.” [Read how Toronto drug lawyer gets marijuana charges dismissed.]

Toronto Drug Lawyer Gets Marijuana Charges Dismissed

If you are facing marijuana charges in Toronto, it is essential for you to speak with an experienced Toronto drug lawyer. Marijuana charges can have serious implications and it is important for you to receive legal assistance from a skilled drug lawyer trained in handling marijuana cases.

My law practice is conveniently located in Toronto, and I defend all types of drug charges from personal possession to trafficking and importing. If you or someone you care about is facing marijuana charges, contact my office to find out how I can help you. My experience with fighting marijuana charges combined with my familiarity with constitutional arguments in the courtroom, allows me to provide you with a superior defence.

Call my Toronto office today at (416) 944-8111 for a drug lawyer who has successfully defended many clients facing marijuana charges.

March 25, 2005 edition of The Toronto Star, by Tracy Huffman

“…Officers later entered the home, testifying that they wanted to be sure there hadn’t been a break and enter and that someone wasn’t injured and trapped inside the home.

Kim’s lawyer, Leora Shemesh argued that evidence of the grow op was not obtained legitimately, with an authorized search warrant, and therefore is not admissible in court. The search of the residence was a breach of Kim’s Charter rights, she argued.” [Read the entire article and find out why an experienced drug crimes lawyer is important.]

If You Are Facing Drug Possession Charges, Call A Drug Crimes Lawyer!

If you are facing drug possession charges, you will need a drug crimes lawyer to prepare your defence. A lawyer with experience defending drug crimes charges will be able to quickly recognize whether evidence was obtained illegally and if it should be admissible in court. An experienced drug crimes lawyer will also know how to challenge the ways in which police officers may have violated your rights through unwarranted search and seizures. Police officers are trained witnesses and a drug crimes lawyer who knows how to properly cross examine these experienced witnesses, will help you get acquitted.

I am a drug crimes lawyer with a proven track record and I also teach cross examination techniques for the Advocate’s society I also have taught other senior lawyers how to effectively cross examine police officers, experts and other crown witnesses.

To learn more about fighting your drug possession charges, call me for a free consultation at (416) 944-8111.

March 24, 2005 edition of The Toronto Star, by Tracy Huffman

“One officer recalled that the frame on the door was damaged. Another said the closing mechanism was broken. And another never noted anything about the door, and testified that if something had been out of the ordinary he would have noticed. Some had concerns about a possible break and enter.

Behind the door was a marijuana grow operation, and when Durham Regional Police entered the Highview Rd. home in Pickering on April 20, 2003, they didn’t have a search warrant.” [Read the entire article and find out about drug possession and search warrants.]

Facing Drug Possession Charges? Call Top Toronto Defence Lawyer.

If you are facing drug possession charges due to an illegal search you need to contact a defence lawyer who has experience defending drug charges. I am a defence lawyer in Toronto, who has successfully represented many clients facing drug possession charges. I have represented individuals who are charged with simple drug possession to individuals facing possession for the purpose of trafficking.

As an experienced Toronto lawyer, I will build you a winning defence by challenging the police officers who may have violated your rights through unwarranted search and seizures. My expertise in the field has resulted in winning decisions. I ensure that any evidence obtained without a legal search warrant cannot be used to convict you.

Call me today at (416) 944-8111 for a defence lawyer in Toronto who has successfully defended clients who were subject to a search and seizure without a legal search warrant.

By: Chistie Blatchford

Meet the alleged tip of the proverbial iceberg: Edmond Young Dun Kim is an accused grow-op producer, and if the estimates of police forces across the country are accurate, and as the Bible puts it, his name is legion, for they are many.

Mr. Kim’s criminal trial on four charges under the federal Controlled Drugs and Substances Act — production of marijuana; production for the purposes of trafficking; possession; and possession of property obtained by crime — began here yesterday before Ontario Superior Court Judge Barry MacDougall.

The charges date back to April, 2003, the year after Durham Regional Police in a record-breaking year busted 120 grow operations.

The area is one of several regions that ring Toronto and which police say are plagued by the proliferation of grow houses in otherwise nondescript residential suburbs. According to recent testimony from Ontario Provincial Police drug expert Rick Barnum, the best estimate is that there are 25,000 grow-ops in Ontario alone.

Mr. Kim’s trial is typical in some significant regards.

For one, his lawyer, the very able Leora Shemesh, is alleging a breach of his Section 8 rights under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, Section 8 being the one that guarantees against unreasonable search or seizure.

Defence lawyers have long argued, frequently with success, that police are careless or misleading in the information they use to obtain grow-op search warrants, and while Ms. Shemesh’s complaint in this case is unique in its circumstances, the Charter breach allegation itself is not uncommon.

If the judge finds there was a breach, some or all of the evidence against Mr. Kim could be kicked out, or the judge could find that the breach is “saved” by Section 24, which holds that evidence is excluded only if a breach is serious enough that admitting the impugned evidence would bring the administration of justice into disrepute.

For another, while it appears there is some evidence that Mr. Kim, a handsome and clean-cut 30-year-old, was either living or had lived in the Pickering, Ont., house where police found more than 500 marijuana plants, he was not the registered owner.

This, too, is the usual course in grow-house busts, The Globe and Mail has learned, with police facing the choice of either charging everyone connected with a property — owner, tenant, anyone who had keys — or merely the occupant. So enormous and resource-consuming is this paper chase that at least one Toronto-area force reportedly has stopped laying charges, and is content merely to shut down an operation, while another allegedly now has a policy of executing a warrant to enter a private house only if there is someone actually in the house at the time.

Ordinary, too, are the items on the long list seized by police at the Highview Road house, as described yesterday by exhibits officer Detective-Constable Cyril Gillis: 190 mature marijuana plants; 196 vegetative plants; 183 seedlings; bread racks where the marijuana buds were set to dry; a weighing scale; nine copies of High Times magazine; all the hydroponic growing equipment (32 ballasts; 28 high-intensity grow lights; 15 timers); $3,300 in cash, mostly in $50 and $20 bills, and, the pièce de résistance, the “pirate panel” — the illegal box by which electricity was diverted to run all the gear.

Mr. Kim was not at the Highview Road house, located on a quiet court, when police arrived on the evening in question and first entered the house without a warrant or when they returned the next day, with one.

But from the other items now in evidence at the trial, and which were also seized there, it appears he had surely been about the place.

There were various documents there with his name on them, albeit many with a different address in Toronto, and a raft of pictures of Mr. Kim, in albums and a curious little book called Couples: A Hot Little Book About Us, which appears to have been put together by a girlfriend of Mr. Kim’s, and featured sections called Things We Do Together, Our Most Exciting Date, Our Future, Celebrations, Affectionate Pet Names and Favourite Rainy Day Activities.

“The real crime here,” one of my colleagues whispered, “was putting together that book.”

Police were first called to the house, Constable Bob Elliott testified yesterday, to investigate a 911 report of two vicious dogs running loose, a Rottweiler and a Labrador cross.

And sure enough, Constable Elliott said, when he and his partner got there, they soon spotted one of the dogs running about, with a crowd of neighbours gathered on the streets outside. To abbreviate a very long story, suffice to say that the officers chased the dogs, Constable Elliott with his gun out at one point, and that, with the Lab on the front lawn and the Rottweiler snarling at the front door, his partner fired at the Lab, missing him, but sending both dogs scurrying into the house, where the door was open.

Constable Elliott then raced to the house to shut the door to contain the dogs, and it was then, he said, that two things really struck him.

One was that the door wouldn’t secure, and appeared to be broken; the other was the strong smell of “fresh, unburned marijuana,” a smell he described as distinct and pungent. “You could smell it in the courthouse today,” Constable Elliott added, startling Ms. Shemesh and everyone else, but Constable Elliott said he thought he could smell it when he walked in the building.

In any case, he said that the open door and its insecure lock led him to conclude there might have been a break-in, and later to worry that perhaps the person or persons who had broken in were perhaps now trapped in the house.

That, he said, gave him the “exigent circumstances” — the term means an immediate threat to life or evidence — that are required by law for police to conduct a warrantless search, and in fairly short order, the two officers accompanied animal control personnel into the home to “clear” each floor — that is, to make sure nobody was there.

In the process, one dog was shot and killed, the other tranquillized such that he too later died, and the officers saw the hydroponic operation. That, in turn, gave police grounds for the search warrant, which was later signed by a justice of the peace and executed the following day.

Ms. Shemesh alleges that the dogs-cum-break-in were but a trumped up rationale for an illegal search. “You were looking for more evidence of a marijuana grow-op, weren’t you?” she asked Constable Elliott.

“My entering the house had nothing to do with evidentiary observations whatsoever,” he replied.

The late Rottweiler appears in some of the pictures with Mr. Kim, while documents from a vet clinic and a tag identifying the Lab as “Montana Kim” confirm he was the owner of the other.

The trial, which could fairly be said to be a bit of a dog’s breakfast, continues tomorrow.