2023

R. v. C.A.F. – [Alberta Court of Justice, Calgary, December 2023]

C.A.F. was the coach of his son’s sports team. It was alleged that during the course of a heated match, that C.A.F. struck a young spectator who had been hanging around his team’s bench. This event was alleged to have taken place mid-game, with parents and other spectators present. There were no corroborating statements from any witnesseses. C.A.F was charged with assault, contrary to s. 266 of the Criminal Code. He hired Ms. Fagan to defend him. Ms. Fagan obtained and reviewed disclosure, and spoke with a number of people who were present that day who indicated that they witnessed nothing untoward. After discussions with the Crown Prosecutor, Ms. Fagan advised C.A.F. that a “conditional discharge” was on the table as an offer … meaning that in exchange for admitting guilt, and complying with conditions that the charge against him would be withdrawn. C.A.F., in consultation with Ms. Fagan, rejected the Crown offer and scheduled the matter for trial. 

BOTTOM LINE: Ms. Fagan was successful in securing the outright withdrawal of the charge against her client when she attended for trial (without any entry of a guilty plea).

R. v. M.W.T. – [Alberta Court of Justice, Drumheller, December 2023]

An elderly male called the RCMP and reported issues with his neighbor down the street. He alleged that M.W.T. (a senior citizen) and yelled at the complainant (also a senior citizen), told him that he could not drive his mobility scooter on the road and accused him of being a paedophile. For whatever reason, the police decided that these circumstances amounted to a criminal offence. M.W.T. was charged with criminal harassment under s. 264 of the Criminal Code, which reads as follows: 

264 (1) No person shall, without lawful authority and knowing that another person is harassed or recklessly as to whether the other person is harassed, engage in conduct referred […] that causes that other person reasonably, in all the circumstances, to fear for their safety or the safety of anyone known to them.

BOTTOM LINE: M.W.T. retained Ms. Fagan. Within weeks of receiving and reviewing disclosure Ms. Fagan successful secured the withdrawal of the charge against her client.

R. v. K.S.A. – [Alberta Court of Justice, Cochrane, November 2023]

K.S.A. was in a public land use area west of Cochrane enjoying the outdoors with some friends. Two conservation officers drove by the group from distance and say that they observed a black male in a stance specific to holding a handgun. The conversation officers detained the group of people, conducted a number of searches and interrogated the group about a handgun. They ultimately found a handgun under a truck parked at the scene. K.S.A. was charged with a number of firearm offences in relation to the handgun, including the most serious charge, s. 95(1) (possession of a loaded firearm), which typically attracts a significant federal penitentiary sentence on conviction. Additionally, K.S.A. was charged with careless storage of a firearm (s. 86(1) of the Criminal Code); and two counts of possession of a firearm without a license (s. 91(2) of the Criminal Code). K.S.A hired Ms. Fagan to defend him shortly after his release on bail. The Crown pre-trial offer was for 2 years imprisonment on a guilty plea. K.S.A. and Ms. Fagan promptly rejected the offer, entered pleas of ‘not guilty’ and scheduled the matter for trial. Prior to trial Ms. Fagan filed a complex Charter application, alerting the Crown to the cascade of Charter breaches that had befallen K.S.A at the hands of the conservation officers, and later the police. The Crown took a different perspective, and emphasized the seriousness of possessing a handgun. The matter proceeded to trial.

BOTTOM LINE: Midway through trial proceedings, the Crown withdrew all charges against K.S.A..

R. v. D.D.D.V. – [Alberta Court of Justice, Calgary, October 2023]

D.D.D.V. was an accomplished and up and coming businessman. He was charged by the police after his former romantic partner alleged that he had threatened and assaulted her. He faced one count of uttering threats, contrary to s. 264.1(1)(a) of the Criminal Code and two counts of assault, contrary to s. 266 of the Criminal Code. D.D.D.V. denied the allegations, and because of his profession, emphasized to Ms. Fagan how critical it was that his matter be taken care of both quickly and quietly.

BOTTOM LINE: Ms. Fagan was successful in (quietly and quickly) securing the withdrawal of all criminal charges against D.D.D.V..

R. v. M.A.A. – [Alberta Court of Justice, Calgary, October 2023]

M.A.A. contacted Ms. Fagan while serving the tail end of a sentence for manslaughter. It was alleged that he possessed a loaded handgun when he was briefly released on parole. The police discovered the handgun after a lengthy multi-target undercover drug investigation. M.A.A. initially hired Ms. Fagan for bail. Ms. Fagan obtained and reviewed disclosure, crafted a thorough proposed plan of release and schedule the matter for a contested bail hearing. The release of M.A.A. was vigorously opposed by the Crown prosecutor on both the secondary and tertiary grounds. In other words, it was the Crown’s position that if M.A.A. was released that he would re-offend and that his release would be contrary to the public interest given the serious nature of firearms and his history for using them. At the hearing, Ms. Fagan highlighted the deficiencies in the Crown’s case and the strength of the proposed plan of release which militated against any perceived risk. 

BOTTOM LINE: The Justice agreed with Ms. Fagan and ultimately granted M.A.A.’s release on bail.

R. v. H.J.J. – [Alberta Court of Justice, Okotoks, October 2023]

H.J.J. was charged with criminal harassment as follows: 

372 (3) Everyone commits an offence who, without lawful excuse and with intent to harass a person, repeatedly communicates, or causes repeated communications to be made, with them by a means of telecommunication.

H.J.J. was an industry leader in the beauty space. It was alleged that she had harassed one of her competitors by repeatedly calling and emailing her over the course of several months. H.J.J. outright denied the allegations when asked about it by the police. H.J.J. hired Ms. Fagan who obtained and reviewed all disclosure, entered pleas of ‘not guilty’ and scheduled the matter for trial. 

BOTTOM LINE: Prior to trial Ms. Fagan was able to secure the withdrawal of the charge against her client.

R. v. B.C.C. – [Alberta Court of Justice, Okotoks, September 2023]

B.C.C. was a mother who attended a sporting event that her daughter was competing at. It was alleged that B.C.C. approached a young female who she had seen bully her daughter and punched her in the shoulder. B.C.C. was charged with simple assault, contrary to s. 266 of the Criminal Code. While B.C.C. was clear that she had spoken to the young female who had bullied her daughter, she was equally clear that no unlawful assault had taken place. Ms. Fagan promptly contacted the Crown to discuss the matter. 

BOTTOM LINE: Ms. Fagan was successful in securing the withdrawal of the charges against B.C.C., without B.C.C. ever having to step foot in a courtroom.

R. v. N.R.R. – [Alberta Court of Justice, Calgary, September 2023]

N.R.R. was an inmate at a federal prison serving a sentence for trafficking drugs and possession of a loaded firearm. One day, corrections officers did a random search of his cell and discovered methamphetamine and a cell phone (both of which are prohibited in prison). He was charged with possession of methamphetamine for the purpose of trafficking, contrary to s. 5(2) of the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act. The Crown Drug Expert estimated that the amount of profit that a person could make selling meth in prison was 300 – 400% more than they could make on the street. The Crown Drug Expert opined that this was not for personal use, and that it had to be possession for the purpose of trafficking/ selling. N.R.R. first retained Ms. Fagan to secure his release on bail. She was successful in securing his release on reasonable terms. The next goal for the defence, was to ensure that N.R.R. was not convicted of this serious charge, and sent back to jail. Ms. Fagan secured and reviewed all disclosure, and took the unusual step of hiring a second Drug Expert to review the file, and provide an opinion as to whether the amount was consistent with personal use, or whether the evidence was such that only an inference of possession for the purpose of trafficking could be drawn. A “data dump” of the contents of the cell phone seized was also generated. Thousands of text messages were disclosed. While it was clear that “someone” was moving drugs inside the prison, it was Ms. Fagan’s position that it was unclear who was moving them. Not guilty pleas were entered and a two-day trial was scheduled. 

BOTTOM LINE: Ms. Fagan successfully secured a stay of proceedings (i.e. the termination of the prosecution against her client) on the first day of trial.

R. v. B.M.A. – [Alberta Court of Justice, Calgary, August 2023]

This case involved charges under the Aeronautics Act and the Criminal Code. Members of the Calgary Police Service were dispatched to the Calgary International Airport to respond to a complaint of an unruly passenger on a WestJet flight. The flight had departed from Calgary and forced to return. It was alleged that during flight B.A.M. refused to wear a face mask (during COVID19) and was yelling/shouting at random passengers. He also allegedly pushed and spat on a flight attendant. An hour into the flight the Captain made the decision to return back to Calgary. B.M.A. was charged with 3 charges under the Criminal Code: s. 430(1)(d) (mischief); s. 180(1)(a) (committing a nuisance which endangers the lives, safety or health of the public and); and s. 266 (assault). He was also charged under the Aeronautics Act. 

BOTTOM LINE: B.M.A. suffered from significant mental health issues and had suffered an unexpected adverse episode during flight. He retained Ms. Fagan to advocate on his behalf. Ms. Fagan was successful in having the prosecution against B.M.A. referred to the Mental Health Diversion Program. Ultimately, all charges against B.M.A were completely withdrawn.

R. v. M.J.L. – [Alberta Court of Justice, Fort McMurray, August 2023]

M.J.L. was charged under s. 276(c) of the Criminal Code (an assault, specifically choking, causing bodily harm). M.J.L. and his partner were consuming alcohol one evening when the topic of ex-lovers was brought up. Not surprisingly, a verbal argument ensued. The complainant got violent and ultimately, called the police asking them to remove her from the home. When the police arrived, an allegation was made that M.J.L. choked and bit the complainant. M.J.L. was arrested and charged. He retained Ms. Fagan to defend him. Recognizing the weakness of the allegations, Ms. Fagan contacted the Crown to highlight the problems with the prosecution. 

BOTTOM LINE: Ms. Fagan was successful in securing the withdrawal of the charges against M.J.L., without M.J.L. ever having to step foot in a courtroom.

R. v. S.H.D. – [Alberta Court of Justice, Calgary, June 2023]

The police were contacted by a male who informed them that his female friend had disappeared one evening from the bar. Several hours later she reappeared and alleged that she had been raped by several males in a hotel room downtown Calgary. The police attended at the hotel and detained and identified 5 males, one of whom was S.H.D.. Several months later a DNA warrant was obtained from S.H.D. and another male, which matched the DNA found in various places in the hotel room and on the females body. S.H.D. initially retained Ms. Fagan for bail and, upon his release, for the defence of this matter. ‘Not guilty’ pleas were entered and a 5 day trial was scheduled in the Alberta Court of Justice. Ms. Fagan also scheduled a day of pre-trial applications, which included section 11(b) and s. 7 Charter applications. In other words, Ms. Fagan alleged that her client’s right to be tried within a reasonable time had been violated (s. 11(b) of the Charter) and that the Crown had failed to provide full disclosure, resulting in a violation of her client’s right to make full answer and defence (s. 7 of the Charter). Ms. Fagan filed volumes of extensive materials supporting her position … and the day before the pre-trial applications were scheduled the Crown terminated the prosecution against Ms. Fagan’s client on the basis of the strength of the materials she filed.

BOTTOM LINE: Ms. Fagan was successful in terminating the prosecution against her client, without the need to proceed to trial.

R. v. A.A.A. – [Alberta Court of Justice, Calgary, June 2023]

Late one night during the Calgary Stampede the police mobilized in response to a call that a person had been “sucker punched” by a stranger, and later that that same person discharges a handgun in the city’s beltline area. The police obtained a description of the person and eventually saw someone who they believed to meet that description. Police drew their guns and ordered A.A.A. to the ground. Over the course of the lengthy detention which followed the police discovered that A.A.A. did not have a gun (or any weapon for that matter). The position of the defence was that the detention was entirely warrantless, unlawful and in violation of her client’s Charter rights. During the course of this unlawful detention, multiple police officers endeavored to hold A.A.A. down to swab his hands for gunshot residue (“GSR”). It is during the course of this unlawful police action that they alleged that one of their members was assaulted. A.A.A. was thus charged with assaulting a police officer.

BOTTOM LINE: Ms. Fagan was successful in terminating the prosecution against her client following a pre-trial hearing on the record in the Alberta Court of Justice.

R. v. W.J.E. – [Provincial Court of Alberta, Wainwright, June 2023]

The police received a complainant from an energy company that W.J.E. had taken a fuel card and used it to fill their personal vehicle with gas on numerous occasions. W.J.E. had been confronted by his employer and he confessed to having done what they believed he had done. The employer turned over the confession to the police, along with CCTV footage from a number of gas stations showing W.J.E. using the fuel card. W.J.E. was charged with fraud, contrary to s. 380(1)(b) of the Criminal Code. W.J.E. hired Ms. Fagan to ensure that he did not end up with a criminal record, which would impact his employment prospects in the future. A plea of ‘not guilty’ was entered and a trial date was scheduled.

BOTTOM LINE: Ms. Fagan was successful in having the charge against her client withdrawn.

R. v. Z.S.N. – [Alberta Court of Justice, April 2023]

The police conducted an extensive investigation into an alleged sex trafficking ring operating across southern Alberta. Z.S.N. was one of several men arrested and charged. Z.S.N. faced 7 charges relating to sexual interference with a person under the age of 16, two counts of sexual assault (against two separate young girls), and charges in relation to sex trafficking of persons under the age of 18. Upon his release on bail Z.S.N. hired Ms. Fagan for what was clearly going to be a defence of a complex prosecution. Thousands of pages of disclosure and hours of media were disclosed by the Crown to Ms. Fagan. Within that disclosure included a full confession which Z.S.N. had (unwisely) made to the police. To say that the odds were stacked against the defence would be a gross understatement. Ms. Fagan entered pleas of ‘not guilty’ on behalf of her client and scheduled the matter for trial in the Alberta Court of Justice. Given the complexity of the issues, several pre-trial applications and trial dates were scheduled over a span of four months. A conviction for a sexual crime of the nature alleged in this case would have resulted in a significant prison sentence for Z.S.N.. The ultimate goal in the defence of this prosecution was to prevent this from happening. Ms. Fagan filed extensive pre-trial materials relating to her client’s right to make full answer and defence.

BOTTOM LINE: During the course of a pre-trial application for disclosure, the Crown and defence negotiated an outcome that would allow Z.S.N. to avoid any jail time. Additionally, no entry of any criminal record for a sexual offence was entered.

R. v. N.R.T. – [Alberta Court of Justice, Calgary, April 2023]

N.R.T. had recently been released on parole while serving a multi-year sentence for a number of offences including possession of cocaine for the purpose of trafficking, possession of a firearm (handgun) and other fraud-related convictions. N.R.T. was arrested following a police chase in which a vehicle allegedly driven by N.R.T. was tracked by HAWCS (the Calgary Police helicopter) along with ground support. The police located a handgun in the bed of a truck and alleged that it was N.R.T. who put it there. Once in custody, the police also laid a second set of allegations. The police alleged that he had possessed methamphetamine for the purpose of trafficking while serving in a federal penitentiary. N.R.T. had an extensive and related criminal record. Notwithstanding the obvious challenges of securing her client’s release, Ms. Fagan scheduled the matter for bail and crafted a thorough plan for release. At the bail hearing in the Alberta Court of Justice, the Crown firmly opposed the release of N.R.T. on bail. Ms. Fagan was successful in securing her client’s release.

BOTTOM LINE: N.R.T. was released on bail.

R. v. A.S.S – [Arrest Processing Unit, Calgary, April 2023]

A.S.S. had an extensive record for drug related offences. The police had conducted a multi-month investigation into suspected drug trafficking. A.S.S. was arrested and a search warrant was executed on a residence that the police believed he owned and occupied. Therein the police located psilocybin, fentanyl, cocaine, a variety of prescription medication and over 3kg of illicit cannabis. A.S.S. was also arrested for outstanding warrants for selling cocaine and illicit marijuana to an undercover officer. He was charged with over a dozen drug and proceeds of crime charges.

BOTTOM LINE: Ms. Fagan was successful in securing the release of A.S.S. on bail within 24 hours of his arrest.

R. v. S.C.S. – [Provincial Court of Alberta, Cochrane, April 2023]

Cochrane RCMP received information from an insurance investigator that S.C.S. was believed to have committed insurance fraud in relation to a number of vehicles. These allegations involved an altered VIN and the use of fraudulent bills of sale. S.C.S. was charged under s. 368(1)(a) of the Criminal Code (acting on a forged document) x2; s. 341 of the Criminal Code and possession of proceeds of crime over $5000 (i.e. the value of the vehicles). S.C.S. met with Ms. Fagan and explained his side of the story (i.e. that he had not done anything wrong). Pursuant to S.C.S.’s clear instructions, pleas of ‘not guilty’ were entered and a two day trial was scheduled.

BOTTOM LINE: Ms. Fagan was successful in securing the withdrawal of all charges against S.C.S. prior to trial.

R. v. H.J.I. – [Provincial Court of Alberta, Okotoks, March 2023]

H.J.I. faced two charges stemming from two separate events at an unofficial dog park. H.J.I., a dog owner, was alleged to have gotten into an altercation with another dog owner while the parties were walking their respective dogs by the river. During this course of this exchange, H.J.I. was alleged to have grabbed and choked another woman. The other woman did not report this to the police until several months later, after she believed she saw H.J.I. again and the observed an expletive spray-painted on her vehicle. The complainant went to the police and H.J.I. was charged with assault under section 266 of the Criminal Code and mischief/ damage to property under section 430(1)(a) of the Criminal Code. Pleas of ‘not guilty’ were entered and a trial date was scheduled.

BOTTOM LINE: Ms. Fagan was successful in having both charges against H.J.I. withdrawn.

R. v. B.R.B. – [Provincial Court of Alberta, Canmore, March 2023]

Late one September day, members of the RCMP stopped an eastbound vehicle on Highway 1 approximately 25 kilometers east of Lake Louise, Alberta for having a cracked windshield (an offence under the Vehicle Equipment Regulations). The vehicle was driving without issue and, when directed to do so, stopped without issue. The RCMP officer approached the driver and engaged the driver in a “Q&A” session. During the course of his interactions with the driver, the officer apparently observed an unstamped pack of cigarettes. The officer thereafter arrested the driver, and less than 2 minutes later began searching the vehicle. The officer located a bag containing a half pound of cocaine. The Applicant was released at the scene and charged with a single count of possession of cocaine for the purpose of trafficking, contrary to s. 5(2) of the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act. B.R.B. retained Ms. Fagan, who obtained and reviewed disclosure, entered pleas of ‘not guilty’ and scheduled a trial date. Prior to trial Ms. Fagan filed an extensive Charter notice stating that the RCMP breached her client’s rights as guaranteed by sections 7, 8, 9, 10(a) and 10(b) of the Charter. The detention of her client was unreasonable, as was his arrest; the search of his vehicle was warrantless and unlawful; and the police failed to inform him of the true reason for his detention (i.e. a drug investigation) and of his right to counsel.

BOTTOM LINE: Ms. Fagan was successful in reducing the charge from possession for the purpose of trafficking (punishable by up to life in prison) to simple possession. B.R.B. avoided a jail sentence on this very serious prosecution.

R. v. W.K.K. – [Provincial Court of Alberta, Calgary, March 2023]

W.K.K. had been involved in an on-again/ off-again romantic relationship with N.K.. One day N.K. went to the police and leveled multiple accusations against W.K.K. of assault (s. 266 of the Criminal Code), assault by choking/ strangling (s. 267(c) of the Criminal Code), assault with a weapon (s. 267(a) of the Criminal Code), intimation and unlawfully counselling someone to die by suicide. W.K.K. adamantly denied the charges and hired Ms. Fagan. The Crown had the choice of proceeding summarily (less serious) or by Indictment. She chose to proceed by Indictment. Ms. Fagan obtained and reviewed disclosure, entered pleas of ‘not guilty’ and scheduled the matter for a 3 day trial. Prior to trial Ms. Fagan reached out to the Crown to reveal some information that she had with respect to the complainant N.K. and the investigation.

BOTTOM LINE: Ms. Fagan was successful in convincing the Crown to withdraw all charges against her client prior to trial.

R. v. R.B.E. [Provincial Court of Alberta, Youth Division, Calgary, February 2023]

R.B.E was charged following a police investigation as to an allegation of vandalism. It was alleged that R.B.E. had thrown several liquor bottles at a residence, shattered glass and causing several thousand dollars in damage. The goal was to seek to avoid the cost and stress on the young person of going to trial, while simultaneously ensuring that no conviction was entered on the youth’s record.

BOTTOM LINE: Ms. Fagan was successful in ensuring that no conviction was entered on the youth’s record.

R. v. H.D.H. – [Provincial Court of Alberta, Calgary, February 2023]

Factually this was a very interesting file. H.D.H. and another male were alleged to have committed a robbery with a firearm (a so-called “car jacking”) in Calgary. The vehicle was later discovered abandoned in a southern Alberta town. A cell phone was discovered in the vehicle which was searched by the police. They discovered a series of videos of a person believed to be H.D.H. and the other male driving the stolen vehicle and shooting a gun out the window. Using the canine unit, the police tracked the scent from the stolen vehicle to a residence, where they ultimately arrested two males. H.D.H was charged with section 344(1)(a) of the Criminal Code (robbery with a firearm); section 244.2(1)(b) of the Criminal Code (intentional discharge of a firearm); a number of possession based offences for the firearm (s. 90(1), s. 94(1), s. 95(1), s. 96(1), s. 88(1), s. 108(1) and s. 91(1)(a) of the Criminal Code). Additionally, he was charged with the masked commission of an indictable offence (s. 351(2) of the Criminal Code). This was not H.D.H.’s first brush with the criminal justice system, and his only concern was staying out of jail on these most serious charges. Ms. Fagan entered pleas of ‘not guilty’ and scheduled the matter for preliminary inquiry.

BOTTOM LINE: Ms. Fagan was successful in keeping her client out of jail.

R. v. A.H.A. – [Provincial Court of Alberta, Calgary, February 2023]

A.H.A. was charged in relation to an alleged “road rage” incident. According to the police, a vehicle allegedly driven by A.H.A. stopped in front of a white vehicle on an off-ramp from Glenmore Trail, blocking the ability of the white car to proceed and bringing it to a stop. The driver of a third vehicle (who the police alleged was associated to A.H.A.) exited his vehicle and kicked the side mirror of the white vehicle. The incident was captured on video. A.H.A. was charged with mischief (damage to property) along with a number of traffic tickets.

BOTTOM LINE: Ms. Fagan was successful in having the criminal charge withdrawn in exchange for a plea to a low-level traffic ticket with a fine of $150.00.

R. v. T.J.T. – [Provincial Court of Alberta, Calgary, February 2023]

T.J.T. was a regular patron at a local Calgary pub. One evening, he hugged one of the female staff members goodbye. Another patron, who was extremely intoxicated, asked if she could have a hug as well. T.J.T. declined. She proceeded to try to hug him anyways. He indicated once again that the answer was no. CCTV shows that she became aggressive and started swinging at T.J.T. He punched the female once and knocked her to the floor. T.J.T. was later arrested and charged with assault causing bodily harm.

BOTTOM LINE: Ms. Fagan was successful in having the charge against T.J.T. completely withdrawn without proceeding to trial.

R. v. T.A.A. – [Court of Queen’s Bench, Medicine Hat, February 2023]

The Medicine Hat Police say that they got a random text from a phone number about purchasing drugs. The police arranged a meet in a small town between Medicine Hat and Calgary to purchase 5 ounces of cocaine. When the undercover officers attended for the meet, 3 males including T.A.A. were arrested. When T.A.A. was arrested, he was put to the floor by the police. When he stood up a bag of cocaine was underneath him. Police also found brass knuckles on him along with cash. T.A.A. was arrested an charged with possession of cocaine for the purpose of trafficking, trafficking cocaine, possession of proceeds of crime and possession of a prohibited weapon. T.A.A. retained Ms. Fagan. She entered pleas of not guilty and entered an election of Queen’s Bench Judge and Jury with a preliminary inquiry. Ms. Fagan succeeded in securing the withdrawal of all but two of the charges at preliminary inquiry. The remaining two charges (possession of cocaine for the purpose of trafficking and possession of proceeds of crime) proceeded to trial. Ms. Fagan scheduled a 4-day trial in the Court of Queen’s Bench and filed a Charter notice alleging the breach of her client’s s. 8, 9 and 10 Charter rights.

BOTTOM LINE: All charges against T.A.A. were withdrawn prior to trial.

R. v. A.J.L. – [Provincial Court of Alberta, Calgary, January, 2023]

A.J.L. was alleged drunk and disorderly at a downtown bar. When the bouncer kicked her out she allegedly threw her cell phone, striking him in the face. A.J.L. was charged with assault with a weapon, contrary to s. 267(a) of the Criminal Code. The event was captured on CCTV, and although A.J.L. left the scene before the police arrived, they were able to track her location to a nearby residence. A.J.L. retained Ms. Fagan to ensure that she did not incur a criminal record because she had ambitious career aspirations.

BOTTOM LINE: Ms. Fagan was successful in having the charge against A.J.L. withdrawn.