• 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. S.L. – ICBC Investigation

Charges: Failing to remain at the scene of an accident.

Issue: Whether our client was obligated to provide a possibly incriminating  statement to the adjuster that could have led to criminal charges and a loss of  insurance coverage.

Result:  Mr. Mines was able to provide the required information to ICBC our client’s behalf. No charges were  recommended. No loss of insurance coverage.

R. vs. R. L. – New Westminster Supreme Court (jury).

Charge: Sexual Assault.

Issue: The credibility and reliability of the complainant and  our client who both testified in this historic sexual assault case.

Result: After  9 hours of deliberations, the jury was deadlocked and could not reach an unanimous decision. No conviction. The trial judge remitted the matter back to court to set a new trial.

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

Charge: Dangerous Driving Causing Bodily Harm.

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

Result: Mr. Johnson was able to persuade Crown counsel to proceed under the Motor Vehicle Act rather than the Criminal Code. After gearing Mr. Johnson’s submissions, the Court sentenced our client to a $100 fine and a 3 year driving prohibition. No criminal record. No jail.

R. vs. S.G. – Coquitlam RCMP Investigation

Charge: Theft Under $5000 (shoplifting).

Issue: Whether it was in the public interest to proceed with a criminal prosecution.

Result: Mr. Gauthier was able to persuade the investigating RCMP member to not forward criminal charges after we settled the matter civilly on our client’s behalf. No criminal record.

R. v. J.D. – Richmond Provincial Court

Charge: Assault.

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

Result: Mr.Johnson was able to persuade Crown counsel to refer our client to the Alternative Measures Program and to enter a stay of proceedings. No criminal record.

R. vs. C.L. – Civil Fraud Investigation

Charge: Fraud/Theft from employer.

Issue: Whether it was in the public interest to proceed with criminal charges.

Result: Mr. Johnson was able to negotiate repayment on our client’s behalf and obtained a civil release from the employer. No charges were forwarded to Crown counsel. No criminal record.

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

Charges: Assault with a weapon; assault causing bodily harm.

Issue: Given elements of provocation, a potential defence of self-defence, and our client’s background as a vulnerable woman, whether it was in the public interest for Crown to continue the criminal prosecution.

Result: Mr. mines was able to persuade Crown counsel to enter a stay of proceedings upon our client successfully completing the Alternative Measures Program. No criminal record.

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

Charges: Assault with a weapon; assault causing bodily harm.

Issue: Given elements of provocation, a potential defence of self-defence, and our client’s background as a vulnerable woman, whether it was in the public interest for Crown to continue the criminal prosecution.

Result: Mr. Mines was able to persuade Crown counsel to enter a stay of proceedings upon our client succesfully completing the Alternative Measures Program. No criminal record.

R. vs. B.L. – New Westminster Supreme Court (jury).

Charge: Sexual Assault.

Issue: Whether the complainant was a credible and reliable witness.

Result: After the complainant was cross-examined by Mr. Johnson for a full day, the Crown elected to enter a stay of proceedings bringing the trial to an end. No jail. No criminal conviction.

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

Charges: Fraud Over $5000; Theft Over $5000 (from employer).

Issues: Whether Crown counsel could prove the full amount of the alleged theft and whether our client would be sentenced to jail in this breach of trust case.

Result: Mr. Mines was able to persuade Crown counsel that they could only prove a $49,000 theft rather than the $75,000 allegation. After hearing Mr. Mines’ submissions, the Court sentenced our client to an 18 month conditional sentence order. No jail.

R. vs. W.W. – North Vancouver Provincial Court

Charge: Assault.

Issue: Given the information Mr. Gauthier was able to provide to the RCMP investigator, whether it was in the public interest to proceed with a criminal prosecution.

Result: Based on the information Mr. Gauthier provided, the investigating officer directed that our client be referred to Restorative Justice, rather than to Court. No charge was approved. No criminal record.

R. vs. H.K. – Burnaby RCMP Investigation.

Charges: Mischief Under $5000.

Issue: Given the information Mr. Gauthier was able to provide to the RCMP investigator, whether it was in the public interest for police to forward charges to Crown counsel.

Result: Based on the significant collateral consequences that a criminal prosecution would bring to our client, Mr. Gauthier  persuaded police to not forward any criminal charge whatsoever.