• 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. J.J. – Vancouver Provincial Court

Charge: Sexual Assault.
Issue: Whether it was reasonable for Mr. Mines’ client to have believed that the complainant had consented to the sexual act.
Result: After considering Mr. Mines’ representations on behalf of his client, the Crown agreed to proceed by way of a Peace Bond and to stay the criminal charge. No criminal record.

R. vs. M.B. – Abbotsford Provincial Court

Charge: Sexual Interference (x3).
Issue: Whether, given the historical nature of the offence and the circumstances of Mr. Mines’ client, it was necessary for the Crown and court to consider a jail sentence.
Result: After hearing Mr. Mines’ submissions on his client’s behalf, the trial judge granted Mr. Mines’ client a suspended sentence and placed him on probation for 15 months. Crown Counsel stayed two of the charges.

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

Charge: Aggravated Assault.
Issue: Whether Mr. Mines’ client was suffering from a mental disorder at the time she stabbed her brother causing life threatening injuries.
Result: Mr. Mines and Crown Counsel presented expert psychiatric opinion evidence which was accepted by the court. After hearing Mr. Mines’ submissions on his client’s behalf, the trial judge found that his client was Not Criminally Responsible on account of mental disorder. No criminal record.

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

Charge: Sexual Assault.
Issue: Whether, in the circumstances, it was appropriate to release Mr. Mines’ client from custody.
Result: Mr. Mines was able to persuade the Provincial Court Judge to release his client on surety bail.

R. vs. J. W. L. – Port Coquitlam Provincial Court

Charge: Aggravated Assault; Assault with a Weapon (x2).
Issue: Whether it was appropriate for Mr. Mines’ client to be released on bail.
Result: After hearing Mr. Mines’ submissions on his client’s behalf, the judge released Mr. Mines’ client on surety bail.

R. vs. D. N. – Williams Lake Provincial Court

Charge: Sexual Assault; Sexual Interference.
Issue: Given the circumstances, what was the appropriate sentence for Mr. Mines’ client who had a sexual relationship with a minor.
Result: The Crown had sought a sentence of one year jail. After hearing Mr. Mines’ submissions on his client’s behalf, the trial judge agreed that a three month intermittent sentence was appropriate, allowing Mr. Mines’ client to maintain his employment.

R. vs. S.L. – Vancouver Supreme Court

Charge: Attempted Murder; Aggravated Sex Assault.
Issue: Whether Mr. Mines’ client was suffering from a mental disorder.
Result: After a five week Supreme Court trial, the judge accepted Mr. Mines’ submissions and found his client Not Criminally Responsible on account of mental disorder.

R. vs. M.T. – New Westminster Provincial Court

Charge: Sexual Assault; Sexual Interference.
Issue: Whether Mr. Mines’ client would be sentenced to jail in this breach of trust situation.
Result: Crown Counsel sought a jail sentence. After hearing Mr. Mines’ submissions on the Sex Assault charge, the trial judge granted Mr Mines’ client a six month Conditional Sentence, followed by probation. No jail.

R. vs. W.S. – Richmond Provincial Court

Charge: Kidnapping; Unlawful Confinement.
Issue: What the appropriate sentence would be in the circumstances. The Crown sought a 2.5 – 3 year Federal Penitentiary sentence.
Result: Mr. Mines negotiated a disposition agreement with Crown Counsel. After hearing Mr. Mines’ submissions on his client’s behalf, the trial judge imposed a 9 month Provincial sentence. No probation.

R. vs. F.K.Y. – Vancouver Provincial Court

Charge: Sexual Assault; Sexual Interference.
Issue: Whether there was a substantial likelihood of conviction.
Result: Upon considering Mr. Mines’ representations and considering the strength of its case, Crown Counsel decided to enter a Stay of Proceedings prior to the trial date. No criminal record.

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

Charge: Sexual Assault.
Issue: Whether it was in the public interest and whether there was a substantial likelihood of conviction.
Result: Mr. Mines was able to persuade Crown Counsel to enter a stay of proceedings on the criminal charge upon his client entering into a s.810 Recognizance (“Peace Bond”). No criminal record.

R. vs. H. H. – Surrey Provincial Court

Charge: Importing Obscene Material into Canada; Possession of Child Pornography.
Issue: Whether, pending the investigation, it was appropriate for police to return Mr. Mines’ client’s seized passport to him.
Result: Mr. Mines was able to persuade police to return his client’s passport.