R. vs. B.K. – Port Coquitlam Provincial Court

Charge: Assault.

Issue: Whether it was in the public interest for our client to be granted a conditional discharge.

Result: Mr. Gauthier was able to persuade Crown counsel to make a joint submission without the necessity of our client being required to complete counselling. After hearing Mr. Gauthier’s submissions the court granted our client the discharge. No criminal conviction.

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

Charges: Assault causing bodily harm, Uttering threats.

Issue: Whether it was appropriate for the court to grant our client a conditional discharge in this breach of trust, family member assault case.

Result: Mr. Mines was able to steer our client through a course of significant rehabilitation, and over Crown’s contrary position, the Court agreed with Mr. Mines’ submission that it was appropriate to grant our client a conditional discharge.

R. vs. A.M. = Vancouver Provincial Court

Charges: Assault with a Weapon; Assault Causing Bodily Harm.

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

Result: Mr. Johnston provided Crown counsel with information about our client’s circumstances, including his lack of prior criminal offending, his efforts at rehabilitation, and the fact that a conviction for either offence could result in the client’s deportation, an outcome which Mr. Johnston argued would be disproportionate to the seriousness of alleged offences. At the same time, Mr. Johnston pointed out weaknesses in the evidence against our client. The Crown directed stays of proceedings on both charges. No jail. No criminal record.

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

Charges: Uttering Threats x3; Criminal Harassment; Breach of Release Order (domestic).

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

Result: Mr. Gauthier was able to persuade Crown counsel that it was more appropriate to deal with these matters in the context of Family Court. Ultimately Crown did not approve the uttering threats and criminal harassment charges and Mr. Gauthier persuaded Crown that there was no public interest in prosecuting the breach charge and to enter a stay of proceedings. No jail. No criminal record.

R. vs. K.L. – Terrace RCMP Investigation

Charges: Assault.

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

Result: Mr. Mines presented additional information to Crown counsel which resulted in Crown  declining to approve any charge.  No criminal record.

R. vs. A.K. – New Westminster Provincial Court

Charges: Assault.

Issue: Whether there was a reasonable likelihood of a conviction and whether it was in the public interest to proceed.

Result: Mr. Mines was able to provide additional information and persuaded Crown counsel stay the charge upon our client completing the Alternative Measures Program. No criminal record.

 

R. vs. K.L. – Vancouver Police Investigation

Charge: Assault Peace Officer.

Issue: Whether there was a substantial likelihood of a conviction in this case which involved an alleged assault of a police officer.

Result: Mr. Gauthier provided information and a video to Crown counsel which showed that the police made an unlawful arrest thereby giving our client lawful grounds to defend himself. Mr. Gauthier was able to persuade Crown to not approve any charges. No criminal record.

R. vs. C.D. – Vernon Provincial Court

Charges: Assault with a weapon; Mischief to property.

Issues: Whether there was a substantial likelihood of a conviction and whether it was in the public interest to proceed with the criminal prosecution in this case where our client allegedly intentionally collided with the complainant’s vehicle.

Result: Mr. Gauthier provided additional information to Crown counsel and was able to persuade Crown to resolve this matter with a s.810 Recognizance (Peace Bond).

 

 

R. vs. J.D. – Surrey Provincial Court

Charges: Uttering Threats (x2); Assault.

Issue: Given the position of the complainant, whether there was a substantial likelihood of conviction or a public interest in proceeding with a criminal prosecution.

Result: After considering  Mr. Mines’ representations, Crown counsel concluded the matter by sending a Caution Letter to our client. No charges were approved. No criminal record.

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

Charges: Assault; Uttering Threats ( domestic).

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. Gauthier was able to provide information to Crown counsel on our client’s behalf which resulted in Crown deciding to enterr a stay of proceedings on both charges. Stay of proceedings. No criminal record.

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

Charges: Assault of a Peace Officer.

Issue: Whether it was in the public interest for our client to be granted a discharge for his actions in spitting in the face of an RCMP officer at the Vancouver Airport.

Result: Mr. Gauthier presented information to the Court and after hearing his submissions, the Court granted our client a conditional discharge. No criminal record.

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

Charge: Assault (domestic).

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

Result: Mr. Mines was able to provide information to Crown counsel that resulted in Crown electing to stay the proceedings and to end the prosecution. No criminal record.