• False Creek at night

Our Successes

Driving Charges

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 The driving prohibition was revoked.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.

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

Charge: Driving While Prohibited.
Issue: Mr. Johnson was able to point to a weakness on the issue of identification and was able to persuade Crown to proceed on the lesser offence of Driving Without a License.
Result: After hearing Mr. Johnson’s submissions, the Court sentenced our client to a fine. No driving prohibition.

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

Charge: Driving While Prohibited.
Issue: Whether it was in the public interest to proceed with the charge as laid.
Result: Mr. Johnson was able to persuade Crown counsel to proceed on the lesser offence of driving without a license. Rather than being sentenced to the mandatory minimum 12 month driving prohibition, our client received a $250 fine. No driving prohibition.

R. vs. K.S. – Vancouver Police Investigation

Charge: Hit and Run.
Issue: Whether our client would be charged with a Criminal Code offence and whether ICBC would breach his insurance policy as a result of his actions.
Result: Mr. Mines was able to persuade police to issue our client a Motor Vehicle Act violation ticket rather than proceed with criminal charges. Mr. Mines was then able to steer our client through an ICBC investigation which concluded without ICBC finding him in breach of his insurance policy, saving him in the range of $10,000.

R. vs. D.C. – Vancouver Traffic Court

Charge: Speeding; Driving without Reasonable Consideration.
Issue: Whether our client had a lawful excuse for driving in the manner he did.
Result: Mr. Mines was able to present medical evidence to the police officer who agreed to drop the Driving without Reasonable Consideration charge and to proceed against our client as the registered owner rather than the driver. Our client was sentenced to a fine but received no driving demerit points rather than the 9 points he was originally facing.