• 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. vs. K.C. – Delta Police Investigation

Charges: Assault Causing Bodily Harm.

Issue: Whether it was in the public interest to proceed with criminal charges for this alleged assault that occured in the context of a recreational sporting activity.

Result: Mr. Mines provided information to the police investigator on our clients’s behalf. Ultimately police decided to not recommend any criminal charges. No prosecution; no criminal record.

R. vs. K.J. – Surrey Provincial Court

Charge: Uttering Threats.

Issue: Given the circumstances of the alleged offence and 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. Gauthier was able to persuade Crown counsel to stay the proceedings and to resolve this matter with a 12 month Peace Bond. No criminal record.

R. vs. Z.A. – Burnaby RCMP Investigation

Charge: Assault (domestic).

Issue: Whether the allegations of this domestic allegation would meet the Crown counsel’s charge approval standard.

Result: Mr. Gauthier was able to provide information to Crown counsel that ultimately led to Crown declining to approve any criminal charge. Our client’s Undertaking was withdrawn, permitting him to resume contact with his spouse. No criminal record.

R. vs. K.L. – North Vancouver Provincial Court

Charges: Assault.

Issue: Given the information we provided to Crown counsel on behalf of our client, whether  it was appropriate to proceed with a criminal prosecution.

Result: Mr. Gauthier was able tp persuade Crown counsel that this matter did not meet the charge approval standard. Croen elected to not approve any charges. No prosecution. No criminal record.

R. vs. J.Z. – Vancouver Provincial Court

Charges: Assault with a weapon.

Issue: Given the circumstances of the offence and the rehabilitative steps that we were able to guide our client through, whether it was in the public interest for our client to be granted a conditional discharge in this case involving our client not obeying  a traffic flag person and assaulting her with her car.

Result: Mr. Mines was able to persuade Crown and the Court to grant our client  a conditional discharge. Our client was placed on probation with a term to perform community service work.

R. vs. X.Z. – Vancouver Provincial Court

Charges: s.810 Recognizance (Peace Bond) Application.

Issue: Whether there was sufficient evidence for the crown to prove that the complainant’s fear was reasonable.

Result: Mr. Gauthier was able to provide information to Crown that helped persuade Crown to enter a stay of proceedings. No Peace Bond was imposed on our client.

R. vs. Z.Y. – Healthcare Insurance Fraud Investigation

Charges: Fraud Under $5000.

Issue: Given the prompt repayment of restitution that we made on our client’s behalf, whether it was in the public interest to proceed with a criminal prosecution.

Result: Mr. Gauthier was able to persuade the investigator to not forward any charges for prosecution. No criminal record.

R. vs. A.M. – Port Coquitlam Provincial Court

Charges: Pointing a firearm; assault with a firearm.

Issue: Given the context of the offence and our client’s remorse and rehabilitation, whether a jail sentence was appropriate.

Result: Mr. Mines was able to direct our client through a course of counselling and was able to persuade Crown counsel to make a joint recommendation for a community based sentence rather than the 2 year jail sentence that was Crown’s original sentencing position. After hearing Mr. Mines’ submissions, the court granted our client an 18 month conditional sentence, followed by 12 months probation. No jail.

R. vs. T.B. and M.L. – Surrey RCMP Investigation

Charges: Possession of Stolen Property over $5000.

Issue: Whether police had sufficient grounds to recommend criminal charges against our clients.

Result: After Mr. Gauthier consulted with the investigator, RCMP decided to refer the case for civil forfeiture and to not pursue  any criminal charges against our clients. No prosecution. No criminal record.

R. vs. I.M. – ICBC Insurance Fraud Investigation

Charges: Fraud/misrepresentation.

Issue: Whether our client actually intended to make a misleading or fraudulent automobile accident claim.

Result: After consulting with us, our client provided an explanation to the investigator that resulted in ICBC deciding to not recommend any charges.  No prosecution. No criminal record.

R. vs. D.C. – Vancouver Provincial Court

Charges: Theft (from employeer) Over $5000.

Issue: Whether there was a substantial likelihood of a conviction and whether it was in the public interest to proceed with a criminal prosecution.

Result: Upon Mr. Mines providing information to Crown counsel that our client had fully settled the matter civilly and that there was a significant chance that a key Crown witness would be unavailable at trial, Crown counsel entered a stay of proceedings.No criminal record.

R. vs. M.M. – Vancouver Provincial Court

Charges: Residential Breaking and Entering x3; Possession of a prohibited weapon; driving offences.

Issues: Whether it was in the public interest to proceed on all outstanding charges and whether 30 months jail was an appropriate sentence.

Result: Mr. Johnston was able to provide information to Crown counsel about our client’s significant rehabilitation plan and persuaded Crown to drop 8 counts against our client. Mr. Johnston persuaded the court to impose a sentence of 12 months’ jail rather than the 30 months the Crown was seeking.