Entries by Mike Mines

R. vs. M.J. – Atlin Provincial Court

/in , /by

Charges: Possession of Prohibited Firearms (x4); Smuggling; Deceptive Statement to Customs.

Issue: Whether jail was the appropriate sentence for our client who brought firearms and ammunition into Canada unlawfully.

Result: Mr. Gauthier was able to present Crown counsel with information about our client’s circumstances and the circumstances of the offence so that Crown revised its sentencing position to not seek jail. After hearing Mr. Gauthier’s submissions, the Court sentenced our client to a substantial fine and did not impose a firearm prohibition. No jail.

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

/in , /by

Charge: Robbery (reduced to theft under$5000).

Issue: Whether there was sufficient evidence that our client used force while committing theft to support a charge of robbery.

Result: Mr. Johnston drew Crown counsel’s attention to weaknesses in witness evidence, persuading Crown counsel to direct a stay of proceedings on the count of robbery and to proceed on the less serious charge of theft. After hearing Mr. Johnston’s submissions,  the Court granted our client a conditional discharge which was particularly significant as our client, a foreign national, would have been deemed inadmissible to Canada had he received a criminal conviction. No jail. No criminal record. Client able to remain in Canada.

R. vs. K.C. – Delta Police Investigation

/in , /by

Charges: Assault Causing Bodily Harm.

Issue: Whether it was in the public interest to proceed with criminal charges for this alleged assault that occured in the context of a recreational sporting activity.

Result: Mr. Mines provided information to the police investigator on our clients’s behalf. Ultimately police decided to not recommend any criminal charges. No prosecution; no criminal record.

R. vs. K.J. – Surrey Provincial Court

/in , /by

Charge: Uttering Threats.

Issue: Given the circumstances of the alleged offence and the rehabilitative steps we were able to guide our client through, whether it was in the public interest to proceed with the criminal prosecution.

Result: Mr. Gauthier was able to persuade Crown counsel to stay the proceedings and to resolve this matter with a 12 month Peace Bond. No criminal record.

R. vs. Z.A. – Burnaby RCMP Investigation

/in , /by

Charge: Assault (domestic).

Issue: Whether the allegations of this domestic allegation would meet the Crown counsel’s charge approval standard.

Result: Mr. Gauthier was able to provide information to Crown counsel that ultimately led to Crown declining to approve any criminal charge. Our client’s Undertaking was withdrawn, permitting him to resume contact with his spouse. No criminal record.

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

/in , /by

Charges: Assault with a weapon.

Issue: Given the circumstances of the offence and the rehabilitative steps that we were able to guide our client through, whether it was in the public interest for our client to be granted a conditional discharge in this case involving our client not obeying  a traffic flag person and assaulting her with her car.

Result: Mr. Mines was able to persuade Crown and the Court to grant our client  a conditional discharge. Our client was placed on probation with a term to perform community service work.

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

/in /by

Charges: Assault with a weapon.

Issue: Given the circumstances of the offence and the rehabilitative steps that we were able to guide our client through, whether it was in the public interest for our client to be granted a conditional discharge in this case involving an alcohol fuelled  fight among a group of young men.

Result: Mr. Mines was able to persuade Crown and the Court  to grant our client  a conditional discharge. Our client was placed on probation with a term to continue with counselling and to perform community service work.

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

/in , /by

Charges: Pointing a firearm; assault with a firearm.

Issue: Given the context of the offence and our client’s remorse and rehabilitation, whether a jail sentence was appropriate.

Result: Mr. Mines was able to direct our client through a course of counselling and was able to persuade Crown counsel to make a joint recommendation for a community based sentence rather than the 2 year jail sentence that was Crown’s original sentencing position. After hearing Mr. Mines’ submissions, the court granted our client an 18 month conditional sentence, followed by 12 months probation. No jail.