Entries by Mike Mines

R. vs. K.M. – Surrey RCMP Investigation

Charge: Sexual Assault.

Issue: Whether there was sufficient evidence to meet the Crown’s charge approval standard.

Result: Mr. Johnson was able to steer our client through the investigation and was able to provide information to police and Crown which culminated in Crown counsel’s decision to not approve any charges. No criminal record.

R. vs. P.H.S. – Vancouver Provincial Court

Charge: Driving While Prohibited.

Issue: Whether it was in the public interest for Crown to proceed with the charge.

Result: Mr. Johnson was able to persuade Crown to allow our client to plead to s. 24(1) of the Motor Vehicle Act. Rather than the mandatory minimum 12 month driving prohibition, our client was sentenced to a $300 fine and a two month driving prohibition.

R. vs. C.F. – Port Coquitlam Provincial Court

Charge: Assault (reduced to s. 810 Peace Bond).

Issue: Given the rehabilitative steps we were able to guide our client through, whether it was appropriate for Crown to proceed.

Result: Mr. Mines was first able to persuade Crown to proceed on a Peace Bond application rather than the criminal assault charge. He was then able to persuade Crown to withdraw its Peace Bond application. No criminal record.

Sweeping Criminal Code Amendments now in Force

The massive criminal law Bill C-75 came into force on September 19, 2019 and is now the law of the land. The bill has resulted in some sweeping changes and far reaching consequences for the Canadian justice system. Generally speaking, the intent of the new legislation is to help streamline the court process by creating various efficiencies. It remains to be seen whether all of these changes only benefit police and Crown counsel. We feel that there may be no benefit whatsoever to accused persons.

R. vs. T.K.- Abbotsford Provincial Court

Charge: Driving without consideration; driving past police vehicle; speeding.

Issue: Whether it was in the public interest to proceed with all counts, which upon conviction would have led to a driving prohibition.

Result: Mr. Mines was able to negotiate a resolution where our client pleaded guilty to only a three point speeding ticket and police withdrew the remaining counts. Our client was sentenced to a fine. No driving prohibition.

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

Charge: Driving while Prohibited.

Issue: Whether it was in the public interest to proceed with this charge which carries a one year mandatory minimum driving prohibition.

Result: Mr. Johnson was able to persuade Crown counsel to permit our client to resolve this matter by pleading guilty to the lesser offence of driving without a valid licence. Our client was sentenced to a fine. No driving prohibition.

R. vs. P.A. Whistler RCMP Investigation

Charge: Uttering Threats.

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

Result: Mr. Johnson provided Crown counsel with information on our client’s behalf and was able to persuade Crown to not approve any charge in this matter. No criminal record.

Dear Michael, Thank you very much for helping me with my problem.Your kindness, generosity and understanding are greatly appreciated.
Best wishes! 

-B.L.