Entries by Jodi Wigmore

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.

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. T.O. – Vancouver Provincial Court

Charge: Sexual Assault.
Issue: Whether, in the circumstance, it was appropriate for the Crown to continue with a sexual assault prosecution.
Result: Mr. Johnson was able to steer our client through an appropriate course of rehabilitation and was able to persuade Crown counsel to proceed on the lesser offence of simple assault. After hearing Mr. Johnson’s submissions, the Court granted our client a conditional discharge. 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. 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.