Who is Nawel Lillian Bailey?

Nawel Lillian Bailey is an Ontario lawyer (Not Practising) with 3 court cases on record from 2012 to 2015.

What courts has Nawel Lillian Bailey appeared in?

Nawel Lillian Bailey has appeared in Court of Justice.

How many cases has Nawel Lillian Bailey handled?

Nawel Lillian Bailey has 3 cases on record from 2012 to 2015.

What judges has Nawel Lillian Bailey appeared before?

Nawel Lillian Bailey has most frequently appeared before Justice Mara Greene, Justice Peter A. Harris.

Nawel Lillian Bailey

3 total

R. v. Turner, 2015 ONCJ 281

The defendant was charged with numerous firearm-related offences following the discovery of two loaded firearms in his bedroom.

The sole issue at trial was the lawfulness of the police search.

Police attended the defendant's residence in response to a 911 call regarding his health.

While paramedics assessed him, officers entered his bedroom without consent to locate clothing for the defendant.

During this search, officers discovered a firearm in a bag on the bed.

A warrant was subsequently obtained to search the bedroom, resulting in the seizure of a second firearm.

The defendant challenged the lawfulness of the initial warrantless search and the validity of the warrant based on evidence obtained through the unlawful search.

ONCJMay 25, 2015

Applicant Counsel

R. v. Pav and Violo, 2014 ONCJ 383

The Crown charged William Pav and Dylan Violo with assault with a weapon and assault causing bodily harm arising from an incident on College Street in Toronto on January 13, 2013, where the defendants allegedly participated in a swarming attack on Joseph Kau.

A directed verdict was granted on the assault with a weapon charge against Violo.

The trial focused on identification evidence and was corroborated by DNA evidence linking the defendants' clothing and Pav's hands to the victim's blood.

The court found both defendants guilty of assault causing bodily harm but acquitted Pav of assault with a weapon due to insufficient evidence of weapon use.

ONCJAug 6, 2014

Applicant Counsel

R. v. Cullingworth, 2012 ONCJ 878

The accused was charged with driving while having over 80 mg of alcohol in 100 ml of blood following a RIDE program stop.

The central issue was the admissibility of breath samples obtained at the police station.

The defence argued the samples were taken in violation of section 8 Charter rights and that the Crown failed to establish statutory compliance under the Criminal Code.

The court found that the officer lacked reasonable grounds to believe the approved screening device was in proper working order, thereby violating the accused's section 8 rights.

Applying the section 24(2) test from R. v. Grant, the court excluded the breath test results and acquitted the accused.

Applicant Counsel