• False Creek at night

Our Successes

Theft & Fraud

R. vs. S.K. – Surrey Provincial Court

Charges: Fraud Over $5000 (from Employer).

Issue: Given the civil settlement  we were able to obtain on our client’s behalf, whether it was in the public interest to proceed with criminal charges.

Result: Mr. Johnson, after successfully negotiating a civil settlement with the complainant, was able to persuade Crown counsel to not approve the criminal charges that RCMP had recommended. No jail. No criminal record.

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

Charges: Theft Under $5000; Uttering Threats.

Issue: Whether, given our client’s circumstances and remorse, whether it was in the public interest for criminal charges to proceed.

Result: We were able to provide information to police investigators which resulted in police deciding to not forward any charges to Crown. No criminal record.

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

Charge: Theft Under $5000 (shoplifting).

Issue: Whether our client, who had an extensive record for theft offences, would be sentenced to jail.

Result: After hearing Mr. Mines’ submissions on our client’s behalf, the Court declined to impose jail, and instead sentenced our client to a fine and six months probation.

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.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. M.A. – Kamloops Provincial Court

Charge: Mischief to Property.
Issue: Whether it was in the public interest for Crown counsel to proceed with the charge.
Result: Mr. Mines was able to persuade Crown to enter a stay of proceedings upon our client making restitution for the damage he caused, writing a letter of apology and completing community service work. No criminal record.

R. vs. M.W. – White Rock RCMP Investigation

Charge: Mischief to Property (under $5000).
Issue: Whether there was evidence that would support a  criminal charge and whether it was in the public interest to proceed.
Result: Mr. Mines provided information to police, which the investigator considered in concluding that he would not be recommending any charges. No criminal record.

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

Charge: Theft Under $5000 (shoplifting).
Issue: Whether it was in the public interest to proceed with the prosecution.
Result: Mr. Mines was able to persuade Crown counsel to allow our client into the Alternative Measures Program without approving any charge. No criminal record.

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

Charge: Theft Under $5000 (shoplifting).
Issue: Given the rehabilitative steps that our client took under our direction, whether there was a public interest in proceeding with the prosecution.
Result: Upon presenting materials to the Crown, Mr. Johnson was able to persuade the prosecutor to not approve any charge. No criminal record.

R. vs. E.C.Z. – ICBC Fraud Investigation

Charge: Insurance fraud.
Issue: Whether it was in the public interest to foirward charges to police and Crown counsel.
Result: Mr. Johnson was able to provide information to the investigator so as to convince him that it was not in the public interest to procced with charges. No criminal or regulatory offence record.

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

Charge: Theft Under $5000.
Issue: Given the circumstances of the offence and the rehabilitative steps our client had taken, whether it was in the public interest to proceed with the charge.
Result: Mr. Johnson persuaded Crown counsel to allow our client into the Alternative Measures program and to stay the charge. No criminal record.

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

Charge: Fraud Under $5000.
Issue: Whether it was in the public interest to proceed with the criminal charge.
Result: Mr. Mines was able to persuade Crown Counsel to allow our client into the Alternative Measures program and to stay the charge. No criminal record.