R v. C. G.  Superior Court and R v P. C.  Superior Court – BACK TO BACK BAIL HEARING WINS ON MURDER CASES
It is of vital importance for someone facing a serious allegation to be free on bail while awaiting trial. If a bail hearing is lost, defendants can wait for months or years in jail before even getting a chance to argue their case in court. The more serious the charge, the more difficult it can be for a lawyer to secure his client’s release on bail. It is important to hire competent counsel to secure a defendant’s freedom as soon as a charge is laid. In the summer of 2019 Robb won two back to back bail hearings for separate clients facing murder charges. In both cases, the crown prosecutors argued against the defendant’s release. Robb won both bail hearings just weeks apart from one another. His advocacy was on point in each case as he persuasively highlighted the frailties of the prosecution’s cases and the strengths of his clients’ bail supervision plans. In the case of P.C. the client reports: “Robb got me back home with my family while I wait for a trial that is almost a year away. I can now prepare for the fight of my life without being confined in jail. I owe Robb more than I can possibly express.”
R V. A. H. 2018 – Trial Win for fellow lawyer facing serious charges
In the 2018 Superior Court case of R v A H – Robb was hired to serve as counsel for another lawyer and fellow member of the Law Society of Ontario who was charged with numerous counts of assault and sexual assault. It is very telling that a fellow lawyer would choose to hire Robb MacDonald when he found himself in the fight of his life.
At trial, Robb had to expose that the Crown’s star witness was not in fact a victim at all but instead was using the court process as a forum to defame Robb’s client with malicious and calculated lies. If she had been believed, Robb’s client would spend several years behind bars. Thankfully, Robb spent 2 and a half days cross examining one witness. Through skilled and diligent cross examination Robb revealed a web of inconsistencies, lies, and fabrication. By the end of his cross examination, the Crown’s witness was proven to lack credibility and Robb’s client was acquitted of all charges. In thanking Robb, Mr. H. offered the following to Robb: “Without you I would have no chance to practice law in Ontario. I would be in jail. I would be destroyed. Thank you for all your hard work and for saving my career, my dignity, and my life as I’ve known it.”
On the heels of this success, Toronto criminal lawyer Robb was hired in 2019 by yet another lawyer and member of the Law Society. This time it was a fellow criminal lawyer who was facing charges. Robb was able to resolve his client’s case without any criminal record being imposed even though his client had faced several, serious charges.
r v M.r. 2017 – toronto police officer charged with sexual assault puts his trust in robb
In the case of MR, a member of the Toronto Police Service faced charges of sexual assault. The officer wanted to avoid trial and to have his charges dropped. He hired two different lawyers to represent him before coming to Robb MacDonald. While neither of the officer’s previous lawyers were able to negotiate the charges away, Robb MacDonald embarked on consistent, persuasive and skillful negotiations with the prosecutors involved in the case. Ultimately, the charges were dropped. Mr R commented with appreciation: “I wanted to see this ordeal over. I wanted it handled and the charges dropped. When you stepped in, things got handled swiftly and professionally. I can’t thank you enough.”
r v Haque 2016 – uber driver charged and center of media CONTROVERSY
In the 2016 case of R v Haque, an uber driver was charged with assault and found himself reeling with the fallout of a media storm surrounding his unfortunate demise. He lost his job with Uber and was struggling to support his family while having to payoff the car that he could no longer use for employment purposes. He was accused of assaulting one of his passengers which brought himself and Uber into the center of controversy. After one article in the media cast Mr. Haque in a very negative light, he reconnected with the media and the following article was printed:
Ultimately, Robb took on Mr. Haque’s case pro bono as he believed in his client and recognized the difficult financial situation he was in. Robb fought hard for Mr. Haque and eventually convinced prosecutors to drop all the charges.
Prison Guard Sent to Jail at Prison Where He Worked is Cleared of All Charges
In the notable case of R v. Jurcic,  OCJ TB a prison guard working at the Thunder Bay Jail was arrested and sent to jail at his own place of employment. During his incarceration at Thunder Bay jail, Mr. Jurcic’s former colleagues and managers became his guards while the prisoners he previously guarded became his cell mates.
Being in custody at his former place of employment was both demoralizing and life-threatening. He was guarded by his former colleagues and attacked by the prisoners he formerly guarded. He was charged with three counts of forcible confinement, two counts each of assault and mischief to property, as well as one count each of assault with a weapon and extortion. The Thunder Bay jail suspended him with pay on March 25, 2013 and he was kept on paid leave until his employer fired him “for cause” on Dec. 13, 2013 based on the allegations.
Initially Jurcic retained local counsel but when it became clear that the matter was on track to proceed to trial he hired Robb MacDonald – a decision Mr. Jurcic called “one of the best decisions of [his] life.” The case went to trial in Thunder Bay on Jan. 23-24, 2014 and the judge reserved his decision until March 4, 2014 when Jurcic was acquitted of all charges. Jurcic reported that MacDonald was a “saving grace” and an “incredible courtroom force.” He added: “watching my lawyer expose the complainant’s lies was the first bit of redemption that I received out of this whole ordeal.”
R v. Mullings  O.J. No. 5028
I cannot leave this case without telling counsel that, as I’m entering a third decade as a judge on this bench, I can count on one hand the number of times I have said what I’m about to say to counsel.
Gentlemen, your courtesy, your civility and your professionalism with one another and to the Court in these proceedings is, in my view, a testament to your considerable skills as advocates.
– MADAM JUSTICE DUNNET
Background: The reported case of R v. Mullings  O.J. No. 5028, involved a lengthy jury trial in which Robb was pitted against veteran Federal Prosecutor, Jason Mitschele. Mr. Mullings was charged with 2 counts of trafficking cocaine and one count of possession of proceeds of crime. After Mr. Mullings was acquitted on two of three counts, Madam Justice Dunnet of the Superiour Court of Justice made the above comments about both Mr. MacDonald and Crown Attorney, Mr. Mitschele.
R v. Hoang
I Feel Like I Owe My Life to Robb.
I lost my fiancé, my job, and almost my house when I was first charged with these crimes. It felt like no one stood by me. As soon as I met Robb I had the utmost confidence in him and I knew he was the man for the job. He spent countless hours preparing me for the trial. During the trial, he performed an outstanding cross examination on the man who’d accused me of these crimes. At the end of Robb’s cross examination I knew that no one in the court room believed his side of story. Robb was nothing short of a life-saver.
– JOHN HOANG
Background: In the well-publicized case of R v. Hoang (September 2012), the Defendant John Hoang faced charges involving: Aggravated Assault, Assault with a Weapon, and Possession of a Dangerous Weapon. Mr. Hoang was dubbed by the media “the road rage stabber.” Mr. Hoang reported to the Toronto Star that he took his case to 2 lawyers who both told him that his case was hopeless – advising him to plea guilty to a three-year penitentiary sentence. A desperate Mr. Hoang retained Robb MacDonald one week before his trial began. Ultimately, Mr. MacDonald won the trial and Mr. Hoang was acquitted on all counts.
R v. Mach  O.J. No. 3326
I had given up hope.
I thought there was no way to beat my charges. I spoke to other lawyers before meeting with Robb MacDonald and I was strongly considering entering a guilty plea. When Robb looked at my case, he suggested that we bring a Charter Argument. I didn’t even know what that was. We spent a whole day in court and Robb and the Crown Attorney argued about whether or not my Charter Rights had been violated because I had to wait so long for my trial date. At the end of the day, Robb’s arguments convinced the judge to stay all the charges against me.
– MR. MACH
Background: In this reported decision, the accused, Mr. Mach, was charged with impaired driving and refusal to blow. The latter charge is among the most difficult to defend because an offence is established once an accused refuses to provide a breath sample to police. In the face of a very strong Crown case, Robb brought a Charter argument pursuant to section 11 (B) of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Robb was successful on the Charter argument and all of the charges against the Accused were stayed by Justice Barnes of the Ontario Court of Justice.