Our Successes
The vast majority of our clients’ cases are resolved favourably.
R. vs. D. H. – Vancouver Provincial Court
/in All Successes, Assault & Threatening Charges/by adminCharge: Assault with a Weapon.
Issue: Whether the Crown could prove that our client was in possession of a machete as alleged.
Result: Mr. Mines was able to persuade Crown to proceed on the lesser offence of common assault. After hearing Mr. Mines’ submissions on our client’s behalf, the Court suspended sentence and placed our client on a no “contact order”. No reporting condition imposed.
R. vs. T.N. – Port Coquitlam Provincial Court
/in All Successes, Drug Cases/by adminCharge: Production of Cannabis.
Issue: The Crown was seeking a 9 to 12 month jail sentence for our client, who was convicted of producing over 700 cannabis plants.
Result: Mr. Johnson was able to persuade the trial judge to impose a $500 fine and to place our client on probation for 12 months. No jail.
R. vs. J.M. – Abbotsford Provincial Court
/in Assault & Threatening Charges, All Successes/by adminCharge: Assault (of child in care).
Issue: Mr. Johnson was able to direct our client through a course of counselling. Given the significant rehabilitative steps our client had accomplished, Mr. Johnson was able to persuade Crown counsel to not approve any charge in this case.
Result: No charge approved. No criminal record.
R. vs. L.M. – Vancouver Provincial Court
/in All Successes, Assault & Threatening Charges/by adminCharge: Assault (domestic).
Issue: Whether it was in the public interest for Crown counsel to proceed with the prosecution.
Result: Upon providing information showing that our client had taken steps toward rehabilitation, Mr. Mines was able to persuade Crown to enter a stay of proceedings. No criminal record.
R. vs. R.J. – Chilliwack Provincial Court
/in All Successes, Driving Cases/by adminCharge: 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. M.S. – Vancouver Supreme Court
/in All Successes, Sexual Offence Cases/by adminCharge: Sexual Assault.
Issue: Given the significant inconsistencies brought out by Mr. Johnsons’ cross examination of the complainant and other Crown witnesses, whether the Crown had proved its case beyond a reasonable doubt.
Result: After considering Mr. Johnson’s submissions, the trial judge found our client not guilty and entered an aquittal.
R. vs. P.M. – Vancouver Provincial Court
/in All Successes, Murder and other Serious Offences/by adminCharge: Attempted Child Abduction; Assault x2.
Issue: Whether the Crown would be able to prove that our client actually intended to abduct the alleged victim.
Result: Mr. Mines was able to persuade Crown Counsel that, by reason of severe intoxication, our client was incapable of forming the intent to abduct the victim. We were able to provide background material to the court which indicated that our client’s actions were truly out of charcter and that he was a very low risk to reoffend. The court agreed with a joint submission for a conditional discharge with 12 months probation. No jail. No criminal conviction.
R. vs. S.C. – Vancouver Provincial Court
/in All Successes, Driving Cases/by adminCharge: 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.
R. vs. M.D. – North Vancouver Provincial Court
/in All Successes, Assault & Threatening Charges/by adminCharge: Assault.
Issue: Whether it was in the public interest for the court to grant our client a discharge. our client was charged in the context of trying to avoid being arrested for fraud under $5000.
Result: Upon hearing Mr. Mines’ submissions, the Court granted our client a conditional dischrge and placed him on probation for six months.
R. vs. M.G. – Surrey Provincial Court
/in All Successes, Drug Cases/by adminCharge: Possession for the Purpose of Trafficking (Cocaine, Heroin, etc.)
Issue: Whether police lawfully searched our client and the interior of his car.
Result: Mr. Mines was able to steer our client through the investigation, which concluded with no charge being recommended.
D.C. vs. Superintendent of Motor Vehicles
/in All Successes, Driving Cases/by adminCharge: 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.
N. A. vs. Superintendent of Motor Vehicles
/in All Successes, Driving Cases/by adminCharge: 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.
