• 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. L.B. – North Vancouver Provincial Court

Charge: Fraud Over $5000 (from employer).

Issue: Given the rehabilitative steps our client had completed and given the compelling explanation of why the offence occurred, whether it was in the public interest for our client to recieve a conviction.

Result: Mr. Johnson was able to persuade the Crown to proceed summarily on the lesser offence of Fraud Under $5000, and after hearing Mr. Johnson’s submission, the court granted our client an absolute discharge. No criminal record.

R. vs. R.G. – Vancouver Provincial Court

Charge: Assault.
Issue: Whether there was substantial likelihood of a conviction in this “road rage” assault case.
Result: Mr. Johnson provided information to the Crown that suggested our client was acting in self defence. No charge approved. No criminal record.

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

Charge: Theft Over $5000.
Issue: Given the steps taken by our client to repay a substantial amount of the alleged $70,000 theft from his employer, whether it was in the public interest for the Crown to pursue a jail sentence that, given the breach of trust, would normally be called for.
Result: Mr. Mines was able to persuade Crown counsel that they could only prove theft in the amount of $40,000. He was then able to persuade Crown to proceed summarily on 8 counts of Theft Under $5000 and to make a joint submission for a conditional sentence. After hearing Mr. Mines’ submissions, the court granted our client a 6 month conditional sentence and made a stand alone restitution order. No jail.

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

Charge: Assault with a Weapon; Assault Causing Bodily Harm.
Issue: Given the rehabilitative steps Mr. Johnson was able to steer our client through, whether our client would be convicted of the offences.
Result: After hearing Mr. Johnson’s submissions on our client’s behalf, the Judge granted our client a conditional discharge. No conviction; no criminal record.

UBC Independent Investigations Office vs. B.F.

Charge: Sexual Assault.
Issue: Whether the complainant could prove her allegation of being sexually assaulted.
Result: Mr. Johnson provided information to the investigator on our client’s behalf, and at the conclusion of the hearing, the allegation was dismissed.

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

Charge: Assault.
Issue: Given the rehabilitative steps our client had taken, whether it was in the public interest to proceed with the prosecution.
Result: Mr. Johnson was able to persuade Crown counsel to enter a stay of proceedings, bringing the matter to an end. No criminal record.

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

Charge: Committing an indecent act (reduced to causing a disturbance).
Issue: Given the rehabilitative steps our client had taken, whether it was in the public interest to proceed with a prosecution on the indecent act charge.
Result: Mr. Mines was able to persuade Crown counsel to proceed on the lesser charge of causing a disturbance, and after hearing Mr. Mines’ submissions, the Court granted our client an absolute discharge. No criminal record.

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

Charge: Sexual Assault.
Issue: Given the rehabilitative steps our client had taken, whether a jail sentence was appropriate in this case.
Result: Mr. Johnson was able to steer our client through an appropriate course of rehabilitation and was then able to persuade the Court to grant our client an 18 month conditional sentence. No jail.

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

Charge: Driving While Prohibited (MVA).
Issue: Whether it was in the public interest to proceed with the charge as laid, which carries a mandatory 12 month driving prohibition upon conviction.
Result: Mr. Mines was able to persude Crown counsel to proceed on the lesser offence of Driving without a Valid Licence. Our client recived a $200 fine and a 2 month driving prohibition.

R. vs. A.C. – Surrey RCMP Investigation

Charge: Assault (domestic).
Issue: Whether the evidence was sufficient to support a criminal prosecution.
Result: Mr. Johnson was able to point to deficiencies in the evidence. He persuaded Crown counsel to not approve any charge. No criminal record.

R. vs. D.P. – Whistler RCMP Investigation

Charge: Assault.
Issue: Whether the evidence was sufficient to support a criminal prosecution.
Result: Mr. Mines was able to steer our client through the investigation and persuaded Crown counsel to not proceed with the prosecution. No charge approved. No criminal record.

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

Charge: s.810 Peace Bond Application.
Issue: Whether the evidence was sufficient to prove that the complainant reasonably had fear of our client.
Result: Mr. Mines was able to point to significant deficiencies in the evidence that allegedly pointed to our client as the party that caused damage to the complainant’s property. He persuaded Crown counsel to withdraw its application. Our client was not subject to any further court imposed conditions.