|
|
USA:
-Private Practice;
-Public
Defender, Washington State; and
-University Legal Assistance, Washington State, Rule 9 Intern.
Canada:
-Private Practice;
-Articled
to Glen Orris, QC, Senior Criminal Barrister, Vancouver; and
Education:
Mr. Gosal has sought Global Perspectives on the Law.
- Doctor of Jurisprudence (J.D.) (Gonzaga University, Washington State - USA)
- Master of Laws in Criminal Litigation (LL.M.), (New York State– USA)
- Bachelor of Arts (B.A.) (UB C - Canada)
- Professional Legal Training Course (Vancouver, Canada)
- Certificate of Equivalency LL.B., National Committee on Accreditation (Ottawa, Canada)
- Summer Readings in Law, St. Edumnd’s Hall, Oxford University (Oxfordshire, UK)
- Summer Session at the University Of British Columbia (in cooperation with the
International Centre for Criminal Law Reform and Criminal Justice Policy and the
Southwestern University School of Law (California) (Vancouver, Canada)
- Over 120 Hours of Continuing Legal Education Seminars since 1999.
Memberships:
Mr. Gosal’s memberships enhance his ability to successfully represent
our clients.
- American Bar Association (ABA)
- Canadian Bar Association
- Washington State Bar Association (WSBA)
- Washington Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers
- Federal Bar Association
- Trial Lawyers Association of British Columbia
- WSBA Criminal Law Section
- ABA Criminal Law Section
Continuing
Legal Education Seminars: You benefit from the time that Mr. Gosal has invested in
actively pursuing legal seminars. The
list of seminars include:
- Race, Poverty, and the Death Penalty: Confronting Inequities of Representation (1999).
- New Strategies for Defending Youthful Offenders in Adult & Juvenile Court (2000).
- Misdemeanors (2000).
- Trial Advocacy (2000).
- Defending DUI’s (2000).
- Criminal Law Semiar (2000).
- Domestic Violence Issues in State Courts (2001)
- Personal Injury Claims (2001).
- Coping With Confessions (2002).
- Defending DUI’s (2002).
- Criminal Law Seminar (2002).
- National Criminal Law Program – Criminal Evidence [5 day program] (2003).
- Impaired Driving and Driving Under Suspension (2003).
- Forensic Issues & Geometry of Blood Stain & Spatter (2003). By Herbert Leon
MacDonell,
leading world criminalist expert on blood-spatter
- Criminal Law Seminar (2004).
-Motions Madness : WACDL (2005)
-Mastering Civil Chambers (2005)
-Rule 18A Applications (2005)
-Criminal Law and the Charter (2005)
-Road Map to DUI Law (2006)
-Conflict Panels (2006)
-Professionalism and the Tragedy of the Commons (2006)
-Impaired Driving and Motor Vehicle Offences (2006)
Online
Legal Research & Computer Skills:
-Quicklaw® trained & proficient
-Lexis-Nexis® trained & proficient
-Westlaw® trained & proficient
-Microsoft: Power Point; Word; Front Page; and Publisher
Jurisprudence
Research:
“Children of A Common Mother: Search and
Seizure Law: American, Canadian, and Washington State Approaches.”
65 p., 1999.
“War Crimes and Crimes Against Humanity:
Legal Approaches and Reflections on the International Criminal Court
Statute.” 30 p., 1998.
“Exclusionary Remedies in Criminal Trial
Proceedings: Washington State and Canada.” 25 p., 2000.
"Comparative Analysis Of Conflicts Of Law: Both Sides
Of The 49th: Canadian and American Usage of Forum Non Conveniens.” 25 p., 1999.
“The
Law of Automatism in Canadian Jurisprudence: Problems and Proposals”
LL.M. Seminar Paper, Criminal Responsibility [2003].
“The
Law of Homicide: Comparative Analysis between the U.S. Model Penal Code
and
the Canadian Criminal Code.”
LL.M. Directed Research, [2003].
“Forensic
Issues in DUI-DWI Litigation: Strategies for the Legal Practitioner.”
LL.M. Seminar Paper, Forensic Sciences [2003].
"The Case for the Right to Silence in Canada."
2003, LL.M. Study Paper.
Cases
Citations:
Regina v. Hostacny, [2005] BCJ
No. 1258, 2005 BCPC 218 (BCPC) (Surrey). Impaired Driving and Over
.08 Prosecution under 253(a) and 253(b). Application by the Crown under
s.714.1 of the Criminal Code, RSC, for an order that a police witness be
permitted to testify elsewhere in the country by video link in the
virtual presence of the parties and the court. Hostacny had been charged
with impaired driving. The investigating officer was stationed almost
5,000 kilometers away and it would have cost $28,000 to have him attend
the trial. The officer was expected to testify for one hour on Hostacny
leaving a night club and taking a breath test. The defence objected
indicating it would impede his opportunity to make full answer and
defence, which would be violative of the Defendant’s constitutional
rights under the Charter.
HELD: Crown Application dismissed. Costs alone were not sufficient
to justify deviation from the established procedure of having the
witness present in court to give his evidence. As investigating officer,
his evidence was not uncontroversial and through video link the ability
of defence counsel to cross-examine would possibly be impeded. Crown
directed a Stay of Proceedings, and the charges were dismissed.
Regina v. Wang, [2004] BCJ No. 1462, 2004 BCPC 214 (BCPC) (Vancouver).
Accused was charge with Impaired Driving and “Over .08”. Gosal, for
the defence, submitted that the basis of the breathalyser demand, or
breath test demand, made to Mr. Wang by Constable Tetreault was not
properly and lawfully founded, and therefore, the defence submittee,
that the Accused’s Common Law Rights, statuory rights, and that s. 8 of
the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, were infringed or denied and that
the certificate and breath test results should be excluded.
HELD: Motion Granted. BAC
Certificate and Breath Tickets Suppressed, as there were no reasonable
and probable grounds for the making of the breath demand.
Bola v. Jim Pattison Industries
Ltd. [2004] BCJ No. 1727, 2004 BCPC 291 (BCPC) (Surrey). Gosal was
retained to represent Bola, who had purchased a vehicle from the
Pattison Dealership. At issue was the requirements under the Motor
Dealer Act Regulation, s. 23, which required A motor dealer to ensure
that in every written representation in the form of a sale or purchase
agreement that they disclosed to best of their knowledge and belief the
vehicle’s history. Bola bought the vehicle, but the Dealership failed to
disclose the entire accident history.
HELD: Judgment for the Claimant, Bola in the amount of $2,676.
Marwaha v. Wheaton Pacific Pontiac Buick GMC Ltd., [2005] BCJ No. 1889,
2005 BCPC 383 (BCPC) (Surrey). D. Gosal & Associates were retained to
advance a position of the tort of negligent misrepresentation, where
Marwaha was induced and relied upon the representations of employees of
Wheaton Pontiac.
HELD: Judgment for the Claimant, in the amount of $3,216.
Regina v. Sandhu, 42 M.V.R.
(4th) 73 (2002), [2002] BCJ No. 696 (BCPC) (Surrey). Accused was
charged with Impaired Driving, and “over .08”. Motion by Sandhu to
exclude a certificate by a breathalyzer technician. A Royal Canadian
Mounted Police officer was stopped at an intersection and informed by a
passing driver of the erratic driving of a motor vehicle behind. The
officer saw a vehicle turn the corner and proceed slowly down the road.
When the officer stopped the vehicle, he observed that Sandhu was
unsteady on his feet, that he smelled from alcohol and that he had an
open bottle of alcohol in the vehicle. A roadside sobriety test was
administered. A Horizontal Gaze Nystagmas test was also administered,
which indicated an elevated level of alcohol in the blood. Sandhu was
then read the demand for breath samples and taken to the police station.
The readings were nearly three times the legal limit. Sandhu argued that
the taking of the breath samples constituted an unreasonable search in
violation of his rights under the Canadian Charter of Rights and
Freedoms because there was no lawful authority to take a sample of his
breath.
HELD: Motion allowed and
breath tickets Suppressed. The police officer relied heavily on the
results of the Horizontal Gaze Nystagms test. However, he did not
strictly follow the recommended procedure. As a result, the results of
the test were unreliable and there were no reasonable and probable
grounds for the breath demand. The other indicia relied upon by the
officer only raised a suspicion that Sandhu was impaired.
Regina v. Marwaha, [2004] BCJ
No. 278, [2004] BCPC 494, (BCPC) (Surrey). Accused had a clean
record, and was charged by the Federal Crown, by Indictment with
possession for the purposes of trafficking in a controlled substance, to
wit: cocaine (scheduled substance), in contravention of 5(2) of the
Controlled Drugs and Substances Act, R.S.C., in an alleged Dial-A-Dope
Scheme. After briefing the issues, and conducting the cross examination
of the Crown’s witnesses, the Court ultimately acquitted the Accused.
The Court did not reach its decision on lost or destroyed evidence
motion, under the Charter, but on issues of continuity of the evidence
of the nature of the substance. These were not minor issues of
continuity. In the Court’s opinion, the inconsistencies relating to
critical exhibits went to the heart of the Crown's case.
HELD: The Crown had failed to establish beyond a reasonable doubt
that the substance found at the scene was a prohibited substance. The
Defendant was acquitted.
Singh Estate v. Shandil, [2005] BCJ No. 2192, 2005 BCSC 1448 (BCSC) (New
Westminster). Application in BC Supreme Court, under Rule 18A in
Chambers, by Estate for return of loan provided to defendant-daughter.
At issue was whether a purported gift was a testamentary disposition or
an inter vivos gift. Discussion of law of Wills, and requirements to
establish a gift, powers of revocation, and burden of establishing a
gift.
Regina v. Raman, BCJ 570 [2002] (BCPC)(Surrey). Argument on
driving prohibitions under provincial legislation, Motor Vehicle Act,
RSBC. Addressing Superintendent of Motor Vehicles Certificates, and
sufficiency of evidence for Crown to establish the essential elements of
the offence.
Regina v. Kiani, [2006] BCJ No.
661, 2006 BCPC 101 (BCPC) (Surrey). Impaired Driving and Over .08
Prosecution under 253(a) and 253(b). The breathalyzer evidence would be
excluded -- The accused, who was charged with impaired driving and
driving over the legal limit, applied to have the evidence obtained from
the breathalyzer readins excluded for alleged Charter violations -- The
accused argued that there were no grounds present for the demand to be
made, and thus there was an unlawful search and seizure, as well as a
failure to advise him of his s.10(b) rights to counsel
Held: The breathalyzer evidence would be excluded -- The accused's
s.10(b) rights were violated -- An assertion of the right to counsel was
made at 2212 hours and in these circumstances a further warning in line
with Prosper was required -- This was conscriptive evidence, and its
admission would result in an unfair trial and would bring the
administration of justice into disrepute.
Contact D. Gosal.
|
|
|
Advanced Criminal Law Trial
Techniques: Preparation and advocacy practice in the United States Federal District Courthouse for Western New York. The seminar focused on a mock non-capital 2nd degree murder case. Sessions were focused on federal motions practice, pre-trial motions, opening statements, conducting examination in chief and on cross, impeachment, document handling, closing arguments, and formulation of jury instructions. Taught by the Honourable and Learned US Magistrate H. Scott, J.
DWI Appellate Work: Pro Bono Appellate brief in People v. Alberti, (NY). Mr. Gosal's portion of the brief contended a violation of the appellant's Fifth, Sixth, and 14th Amendment rights to: due process; compulsory process; confrontation; self-incrimination; and trial fairness. In addition, arguments on non constitutional grounds were submitted, including: erroneous use of judicial notice, and improper exclusion of lay opinion evidence.
|
Common Law Tradition: Exploring basic Common Law traditions, and building upon a framework provided by Yale Law Dean Anthony Kornman, who was inspired by the writings and career of Karl Llewellyn, a major figure in the American Legal Realist movement. Survey on significant jurists, including the Late and Learned: John Sopinka, William Brennan Jr., Learned Hand, Benjamin Cardoza, Clarence Darrow; Sandra O'Connor, and Oliver W. Holmes. Taught by Professor of Law Louis Swartz.
|
|
Criminal Case
Preparation: Specialized training in criminal case preparation. Such preparation affords the defence a practical and meaningful system for the work product, and preparation for trial. Taught by senior NY practitioner John Condon.
The Law of Homicide: A comparative analysis of the Homicide provisions in the U.S. Model Penal Code, and the Criminal Code of Canada. Focus on the mens rea, actus reus, fault requirements, and defences.
|
