Entries by Mike Mines

R. vs. Y.Z. – Richmond Provincial Court

/in , /by

Charge: Attempted Murder (reduced to assault with a weapon).

Issue: Given the circumstances of the event and given our client’s mental health condition, whether our client truly had the intention to kill the complainant.

Result: Mr. Gauthier was able to provide medical/psychological information to Crown counsel and, ultimately, was able to persuade Crown to proceed on the lesser offence of assault with a weapon and to make a joint recommendation to the court for a conditional discharge, rather than the lengthy jail sentence they were originally seeking.  After hearing Mr. Gauthier’s submissions, the Court granted our client the discharge. No criminal conviction. No jail.

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

/in , /by

Charges: Assault x2 (Reduced to Peace Bond).

Issue: Given the potential for self-defence in this case, whether it was appropriate for the criminal prosecution to continue.

Result: Mr. Mines was able to provide information to Crown counsel which resulted in Crown’s decision to proceed with a Peace Bond rather than the criminal charges. No criminal record.

R. v. G.K. – Fort St. John Provincial Court

/in , /by

Charge: Theft/ Fraud Over $5000 (from employer).

Issue: Whether Crown could prove the alleged $300,000 offence and, given the rehabilitative steps that we were able to guide our client through, whether a jail sentence was necessary.

Result: Mr. Gauthier was able to persuade Crown counsel that they could only prove that our client was responsible for a $74,000 theft. Further, despite the breach of trust, in this case, Mr. Gauthier was able to persuade Crown counsel to seek a conditional sentence, rather than jail. After hearing Mr. Gauthier’s submissions, the court sentenced our client to a 2 year conditional sentence. No jail.

R. vs. C.Y. – Richmond Provincial Court

/in , /by

Charges: Assault with a weapon ( reduced to Peace Bond).

Issue: Given 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. Mines was able to persuade Crown counsel to allow our client to resolve this matter with a s. 810 Recognizance (Peace Bond) for a period of 12 months. Stay of proceedings on the criminal charge. No criminal record.

R. vs. F.K. – Vancouver Provincial Court

/in , /by

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

Issue: Whether the pre-charge delay of 3.5 years would reduce the sentence in this $215,000 employee fraud case.

Result: Mr. Mines was able to persuade the trial judge and Crown counsel that there was merit to our application for a judicial stay of proceedings based on our client’s inability to properly defend the charges due to a delay of about 4 years in getting the charges approved. Notwithstanding this breach of trust, Mr. Mines was able to negotiate a plea arrangement in which our client received a 2 year conditional sentence order with a 10 pm curfew for 12 months. No monies were ordered to be repaid. No jail.

R. vs. J.H. – Abbotsford Provincial Court

/in , /by

Charge: Failing to stop at an accident resulting in bodily harm.

Issue: Given the circumstances of the offence, our client’s background and his extreme remorse, whether a jail sentence was warranted.

Result: Mr. Gauthier was ble to direct our client through a course of psychological counselling and was able to persuade Crown counsel to agree to a non-custodial sentence. After hearing Mr. Gauthier’s submissions, the Court sentenced our client to a 12 month conditional sentence. No jail.

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

/in , /by

Charges: Theft Over $5000 (from employer).

Issue: Whether Crown counsel had sufficient evidence to meet the charge approval standard.

Result: Mr. Mines was able to persuade Crown counsel that important evidence would be missing from a cenrtal witness and to not approve any charges. No criminal record.

R. vs. K.H. – Abbotsford Provincial Court

/in , , /by

Charges: Breaking and entering a dwelling house and committing an indictable offence, wearing a mask for the purpose of committing an indictable offence, breach of release order.

Issue: Whether it would be consistent with the principles of sentencing for our client to serve his sentence in the community.

Result: Mr. Johnston provided Crown counsel with information which, along with our client’s rehabilitative progress and good compliance with strict bail conditions, persuaded the Crown to seek a jail sentence of under two years for his role in a violent “home invasion”. After hearing Mr. Johnston’s submissions, the court agreed it would not be inconsistent with the principles of sentencing for our client to serve his sentence in the community instead of in custody. This was a significant result for our client as home invasion convictions typically result in lengthy jail sentences served in federal prison. No further time in custody.

T.G.

/in /by

Thank you for settling our case peacefully. We dealt with Patrick Johnson with Mines and Company. I recommend Mr Johnston for those who are struggling with a family case. I also found the fees very affordable. I was very afraid to approach this company and worried about how to handle this case, but Mr Johnston […]

R. vs. G.T. – Surrey Provincial Court

/in , /by

Charge: Assault.

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

Result: Mr. Johnston provided Crown counsel with information which, along with our client’s progress with counselling, persuaded the Crown to gradually relax our client’s bail conditions and ultimately direct a stay of proceedings on the charge. No further prosecution. No criminal record.

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

/in , /by

Charges: Impaired Driving.

Issue: Whether Crown counsel could prove the impaired driving offence in light of evidence brought forward by Mr. Gauthier which suggested that our client did not voluntarily consume the drug that may have contributed to the the manner of his driving and the ensuing accident.

Result: Mr. Gauthier was able to persuade Crown counsel to proceed on the lesser charge of dangerous operation and, rather than being convicted of impaired driving, our client was granted a conditional discharge. No criminal conviction.