Entries by Mike Mines

R. vs. S.M.A. – Vancouver Provincial Court

/in , /by

Charge: Dangerous Driving Causing Bodily Harm.

Issue: Whether there was a substantial likelihood of a criminal conviction and whether it was in the public interest to proceed with a criminal charge.

Result: Mr. Johnson was able to persuade Crown counsel to proceed under the Motor Vehicle Act rather than the Criminal Code. After gearing Mr. Johnson’s submissions, the Court sentenced our client to a $100 fine and a 3 year driving prohibition. No criminal record. No jail.

R. vs. S.G. – Coquitlam RCMP Investigation

/in , /by

Charge: Theft Under $5000 (shoplifting).

Issue: Whether it was in the public interest to proceed with a criminal prosecution.

Result: Mr. Gauthier was able to persuade the investigating RCMP member to not forward criminal charges after we settled the matter civilly on our client’s behalf. No criminal record.

R. vs. J.S. – Surrey Provincial Court

/in , /by

Charge: Assault

Issue: Whether our client should receive the same sentence as she did for a prior offence, or a more serious sentence resulting in a criminal record.

Result: Mr. Johnston persuaded the court that a conditional discharge was appropriate, even though she had already received a similar sentence following a guilty plea to an earlier offence. In making its decision, the court also accepted Mr. Johnston’s arguments that the available evidence showed our client’s actions were not as serious as the victim claimed, and that our client’s actions were partly explained by the victim’s conduct on the date of the offence and the history of negative interactions between them. No jail. No criminal record.

R. v. J.D. – Richmond Provincial Court

/in , /by

Charge: Assault.

Issue: Given the rehabilitative steps we were able to guide our client through, whether it was in the public interest to continue with the criminal prosecution.

Result: Mr.Johnson was able to persuade Crown counsel to refer our client to the Alternative Measures Program and to enter a stay of proceedings. No criminal record.

 

R. vs. C.L. – Civil Fraud Investigation

/in , /by

Charge: Fraud/Theft from employer.

Issue: Whether it was in the public interest to proceed with criminal charges.

Result: Mr. Johnson was able to negotiate repayment on our client’s behalf and obtained a civil release from the employer. No charges were forwarded to Crown counsel. No criminal record.

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

/in , /by

Charges: Assault with a weapon; assault causing bodily harm.

Issue: Given elements of provocation, a potential defence of self-defence, and our client’s background as a vulnerable woman, whether it was in the public interest for Crown to continue the criminal prosecution.

Result: Mr. mines was able to persuade Crown counsel to enter a stay of proceedings upon our client succesfully completing the Alternative Measures Program. No criminal record.

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

/in , /by

Charges: Assault with a weapon; assault causing bodily harm.

Issue: Given elements of provocation, a potential defence of self-defence, and our client’s background as a vulnerable woman, whether it was in the public interest for Crown to continue the criminal prosecution.

Result: Mr. mines was able to persuade Crown counsel to enter a stay of proceedings upon our client successfully completing the Alternative Measures Program. No criminal record.

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

/in , /by

Charges: Fraud Over $5000; Theft Over $5000 (from employer).

Issues: Whether Crown counsel could prove the full amount of the alleged theft and whether our client would be sentenced to jail in this breach of trust case.

Result: Mr. Mines was able to persuade Crown counsel that they could only prove a $49,000 theft rather than the $75,000 allegation. After hearing Mr. Mines’ submissions, the Court sentenced our client to an 18 month conditional sentence order. No jail.

R. vs. H.K. – Burnaby RCMP Investigation.

/in , /by

Charges: Mischief Under $5000.

Issue: Given the information Mr. Gauthier was able to provide to the RCMP investigator, whether it was in the public interest for police to forward charges to Crown counsel.

Result: Based on the significant collateral consequences that a criminal prosecution would bring to our client, Mr. Gauthier  persuaded police to not forward any criminal charge whatsoever.