• False Creek at night

Our Successes

Driving Charges

T.T. vs. The Queen – Vancouver Supreme Court (Appeal Div.)

Charge: Violation Ticket, Conviction Appeal.
Issue: Whether there was a legitimate reason for missing the appeal deadline and whether there was merit to the appeal.
Result: After hearing Mr. Mines’ submissions, the Appeal Court granted the application to extend time, allowed the appeal and quashed the conviction.

R. vs. A.S. – Vancouver Traffic Court

Charge: Speeding.
Issue: Whether the officer was able to say with certainty that it was our client’s car that he had recorded as speeding with his laser device; whether there was a public interest in proceeding.
Result: After considering Mr. Mines’ submissions, the police officer withdrew the violation ticket.

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

Charge: Driving While Prohibited.
Issue: Whether our client would be sentenced to the mandatory minimum 12 month driving prohibition.
Result: Mr. Johnson was able to persuade Crown counsel to proceed on the lesser offence of driving without a licence. After hearing Mr. Johnson’s submissions, the Court imposed a fine and a 2 month driving prohibition.

R. vs. R.J. – Chilliwack Provincial Court

Charge: Driving While Prohibited.
Issue: Whether it was in the public interest to proceed with the charge, which carries a minimum mandatory penalty of a 12 month driving prohibition.
Result: Mr. Mines was able to persuade Crown counsel to proceed on the lesser offence of driving without a valid licence. After hearing Mr. Mines’ submissions, the court imposed the minimum $300 fine. No driving prohibition.

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

Charge: Driving While Prohibited.
Issue: Whether it was in the public interest to proceed with this charge that carries a mandatory 12 month driving prohibition.
Result: Mr. Mines was able to persuade Crown counsel to proceed on the lesser offence of driving without a licence. The trial judge sentenced our client to a $300 fine and a 2 month driving prohibition.

N. A. vs. Superintendent of Motor Vehicles

Charge: 90 Day Administrative Driving Prohibition.
Issue: Whether the police officer had made a lawful breath demand.
Result: Mr. Mines was able to persuade the adjudicator that our client had no obligation to comply with a breath demand that was not authorized by the Criminal Code. The driving prohibition was revoked. All fees and penalties were returned to our client. No driving prohibition.

D.C. vs. Superintendent of Motor Vehicles

Charge: Notice of Intent to Prohibit Driving.
Issue: Whether it would be possible to extend the time to dispute a violation ticket that caused the notice of driving prohibition to be issued.
Result: Mr. Mines was able to get the conviction removed from our client’s driving record. Without that conviction, the Superintendent withdrew the Intent to Prohibit and our client was able to resume driving.

R. vs. R.R. – Surrey Provincial Court

Charge: Obstruct Police; Resist Arrest.
Issue: Whether it was in the public interest to prosecute our client who was extremely uncooperative with police during their impaired driving investigation of him.
Result: Mr. Mines was able to persuade Crown counsel to let our client into the Alternative Measures program. This ended the prosecution. No criminal record.

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

Charge: Driving while prohibited.
Issue: Whether it was in the public interest to proceed with the charge.
Result: Mr. Johnson was able to persuade Crown counsel to proceed on the lesser offence of Driving Without a Valid License. Rather than a mandatory one year driving prohibition, our client was sentenced to a $300 fine. No driving prohibition.

R. vs. M.M. – ICBC Investigation

Charge: Fraud; Misrepresentation.
Issue: Given our client’s remorse and cooperation, whether there was a public interest in proceeding with a criminal charge.
Result: Mr. Johnson was able to steer our client through the investigation and was able to persuade the investigator to not forward any charges to Crown counsel. No criminal record.

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

Charge: Driving While Prohibited.
Issue: Given our client’s circumstances and the circumstances of the offence, whether it was in the public interest to proceed with the charge.
Result: Mr. Mines was able to persuade Crown counsel to enter a stay of proceedings. Our client was able to avoid the mandatory minimum one year driving prohibition.

R. vs. H.T. – Vancouver Provincial Court

Charge: Driving While Prohibited.
Issue: Whether, given our client’s circumstances, it was in the public interest to proceed with the charge.
Result: Mr. Johnson was able to persuade Crown to proceed on the lesser offence of Driving Without a License. Rather than the mandatory minimum 12 month driving prohibition, the Court imposed a one month driving prohibition and a $200 fine.