• False Creek at night

Our Successes

Sexual Offences

R. vs. A.S. – Port Coquitlam Provincial Court

Charge: Sex Assault.
Issue: Whether there was a substantial likelihood of a conviction.
Result: Mr. Mines was able to steer our client through the investigation and provided information to Crown counsel which contributed to Crown deciding to not approve any criminal charge in this matter.

R. vs. J.S. – Vancouver Provincial Court

Charge: Sexual Assault.
Issue: Whether our client had a reasonable and honest belief that the complainant had consented to the sexual activity.
Result: On the fourth day of trial, after Mr. Johnson had vigorously cross examined the complainant, the Crown entered a stay of proceedings on the criminal charges and our client entered into a Peace Bond. No criminal record.

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

Charge: Sex Assault.
Issue: Whether there was sufficient evidence to proceed with a criminal charge.
Result: Mr. Johnson was able to steer our client through the investigation which ended with police recommending no chargesl. No criminal record.

R. vs. N.D. – Vancouver Supreme Court

Charge: Sexual Assault; Break and Entering.
Issue: Whether, given the loss of crucial evidence by police, our client could receive a fair trial.
Result: Mr. Johnson was able to persuade Crown counsel that our client’s right to a fair trial was breached. Crown entered a stay of proceedings. No criminal record.

R. vs. R.K. – Surrey RCMP Investigation

Charge: Possession of Child Pornography.
Issue: Whether there was sufficient evidence to proceed with a criminal charge.
Result: Mr. Mines was able to steer our client through the police investigation which ended with police concluding that our client did not knowingly possess any illegal images. No charges recommended. No criminal record. All seized property was returned to our client.

R. vs. G.H. – Ridge Meadows RCMP Investigation

Charge: Sexual Assault.
Issue: Whether there was a substantial likelihood of a conviction with respect to this historical sex assault complaint.
Result: Mr. Mines was able to steer our client through the police investigation which concluded with police not recommending any charges. No criminal record.

R. vs. I.N. – West Vancouver Police investigation

Charge: Sex Assault.
Issue: Whether there was sufficient evidence against our client to recommend a charge.
Result: Mr. Johnson was able to steer our client through the police investgation which concluded with no charges being recommended. No criminal record.

R. vs. V.C. – Surrey Provincial Court

Charge: Sexual Interference; Sexual Assault.
Issue: In the circumstances of this historic “breach of trust” sexual interference against a minor, whether our client would be sentenced to jail.
Result: Mr. Mines was able to persuade Crown that there was strong proof of only one incident of sexual misconduct. After hearing Mr. Mines’ submissions, the court granted our client a 12 month conditional sentence followed by 18 months probation.

R. vs. N.D. – British Columbia Supreme Court

Charge: Breach of Recognizance (x4) re: Sex Assault case.
Issue: Given potential defences raised by Mr. Johnson, whether it was in the public interest for Crown counsel to proceed.
Result: Just prior to the start of this three day Supreme Court trial, Mr. Johnson was able to persuade Crown counsel to enter stays of proceeedings on all four charges. No criminal record.

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

Charge: Sexual Assault; Unlawful Confinement.
Issue: Whether there was  a reasonable likelihood of a conviction.
Result: By obtaining further relevant evidence through several successful disclosure requests, Mr. Johnson was able to persuade Crown counsel that there were no longer sufficient grounds for a prosecution. Stay of Proceedings. No criminal record.

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

Charge: Voyeurism.
Issue: Whether, given the circumstances of the offence and the rehabilitative steps our client had taken, whether it was necessary for the Court to enter a conviction.
Result: Upon considering Mr. Johnson’s submissions on our client’s behalf, the Court granted our client a Conditional Discharge and placed him on probation.

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

Charge: Sex Assault (investigation).
Issue: Whether Crown Counsel would approve charges against our client.
Result: We were able to steer our client through the investigation and ultimately persuaded Crown Counsel that, given the circumstances, there was no public interest in proceeding with a criminal prosecution. No charges approved. No criminal record.