You are here: / All Successes

  • We have a proven record of success.

    Defending criminal and driving charges since 1993.

    False Creek at night

Our Successes

The vast majority of our clients’ cases are resolved favourably.

R. v. L.M. – Vancouver Provincial Court

/in , /by

Charge: Mischief Over $5000.

Issue: Whether Crown could prove the value of damage alleged to have been caused by our client.

Result: Mr. Mines was able to persuade Crown counsel that they could not accurately prove the value of damage, and that our client had taken appropriate steps of self-rehabilitation. Crown elected to not approve any charges. No criminal record.

R. v. H.K. – Port Coquitlam Provincial Court

/in , , /by

Charge: Assault.

Issue: Whether it was in the public interest to proceed with a criminal prosecution in this “road rage” case.

Result: Mr. Mines was able to provide information to Crown counsel about our client’s personal circumstances and the circumstances of the incident which resulted in Crown staying the charge after our client completed Alternative Measures. No criminal record.

R. v. J.S. – North Vancouver Provincial Court

/in , /by

Charges: Uttering Threats (x3).

Issue: Whether or not our client was entitled to be sentenced to a conditional discharge rather than being convicted of this offence.

Result: Upon hearing Mr. Gauthier’s submissions on our client’s behalf, the Court granted our client a conditional discharge rather than entering a conviction. No criminal record.

R. v. S.G. – Surrey Provincial Court

/in , , /by

Charges: Assault; Mischief.

Issue: Given the rehabilitative steps that we guided our client through and advocating on her behalf that there was a reasonable self defence issue, whether there was a substantial likelihood of securing a conviction.

Result: Mr. Gauthier was able to persuade Crown counsel that there was no substantial likelihood of a conviction. Ultimately Crown entered a stay of proceedings. No criminal conviction. No criminal record.

R. v. K.B.K. – Vancouver Provincial Court

/in , , /by

Charges: Assault with a Prohibited Weapon.

Issue: Given our client’s background, his rehabilitative success and the circumstances of the incident, whether there was a public interest in continuing with the prosecution.

Result: Mr. Mines was able to guide our client through counselling and was ultimately able to persuade Crown counsel to allow our client into the Alternative Measures Program. Upon our completion of Alternative Measures, Crown counsel entered a stay of proceedings, bringing this matter to an end. No criminal record.

R. v. C.B.S. – Richmond Provincial Court

/in , , /by

Charges: B&E; Assault; Distribute Intimate Images.

Issue: Whether the Crown could comply with a defence disclosure request and possibly face a Charter application to have charges stayed due to unreasonable delay.

Result: On the eve of the trial, Mr. Mines was able to persuade Crown to allow our client to plead guilty to the least serious charge, assault by slapping. Crown nonetheless sought a conviction and probation but, after hearing Mr. Mines’ submissions, the trial judge granted our client a conditional discharge. No criminal conviction.

R. v. V.L. – Vancouver Provincial Youth Court

/in , /by

Charge: Assault.

Issue: Given the rehabilitative steps we were able to guide our client through, whether there was a public interest in proceeding with criminal charges.

Result: After providing Crown counsel with our client’s  positive psychological counselling report, Mr. Gauthier  was able to persuade Crown counsel to enter a stay of proceedings. No criminal record.

R. v. C.J.X. – Richmond Provincial Court

/in , /by

Charges:  Assault with a Weapon.

Issue: Given the rehabilitative steps we were able to guide our client through, whether there was a public interest in proceeding with criminal charges.

Result: After providing Crown counsel with our client’s  positive psychological counselling report, Mr. Gauthier  was able to persuade Crown counsel to enter a stay of proceedings. No criminal record.

R. v. B.E. – Surrey Provincial Court

/in , /by

Charges: Assault (domestic) x2.

Issue: Given the rehabilitative steps we were able to guide our client through, whether it was in the public interest to proceed with the criminal prosecution.

Result: Mr. Mines was able to provide information to Crown counsel on our client’s behalf and ultimately persuaded Crown to enter a stay of proceedings. No criminal record.

R. v. A.S. – Vancouver Provincial Court

/in , /by
Charges: B & E, Fraud over $5000, Motor vehicle theft; Identity theft, Driving while prohibited (x2).
Issue: Given our client’s personal circumstances and rehabilitative efforts, what would be the appropriate sentence.
Result:  Mr. Johnston was able to persuade Crown to make a joint submission for time-served, followed by a period of probation. The Crown directed stays of proceedings on several charges.  After hearing Mr. Johnston’s submissions on our client’s behalf, the sentencing judge noted that he would have ordinarily imposed a lengthy jail sentence for an accused in our client’s position, but he accepted the joint submission. No further jail.

R. v. M.A.K. – Vancouver Provincial Court

/in , /by
Charge: Possession of fentanyl and carfentanil for the purposes of trafficking.
Issue: Given the information Mr. Johnston provided to Crown counsel regarding our client’s personal circumstances and the circumstances of the alleged offence, whether it was appropriate to proceed with a criminal prosecution.
Result: Mr. Johnston was able to persuade the Crown that there were issues with respect to the Crown’s evidence such that it was unlikely our client would be convicted at trial, and that there was insufficient public interest in continuing to prosecute our client in any case. Given this informaton, the Crown directed a stay of proceedings on the charge. No criminal record.

R. v. S.B. – Vancouver Provincial Court

/in , /by

Charge: Carrying a Concealed Weapon.

Issue: Given the information Mr. Johnston was able to provide to Crown counsel regarding the circumstances of the incident and our client’s background, whether it was in the public interest to proceed with a criminal prosecution.

Result: Mr. Johnston persuaded Crown counsel that there was insufficient public interest, leading Crown to enter a stay of proceedings. No criminal record.

Title Here

Refine by Category