Charge: Assault (domestic).
Issue: Whether it was in the public interest to proceed with the charges.
Result: Based on rehabilitative steps our client initiated, we were able to persuade Crown counsel to not approve any charge and to allow our client into the Alternative Measures Program.
Charge: Assault (domestic) x2
Issue: Given the rehabilitative steps taken by our client, whether it was in the public interest to proceed with the criminal charges.
Result: Mr. Johnson was able to persuade Crown Counsel to stay both counts prior to trial. No criminal record.
Charge: Assault; Breach of Undertaking (x2).
Issue: Whether our client was acting in self defence and whether the complainant induced the breaches.
Result: The trial judge dismissed all three charges. No criminal record.
Charge: Assault (spousal).
Issue: Whether it was in the public interest to proceed with the charge considering the rehabilitative steps our client had taken.
Result: Mr. Johnson persuded Crown to enter a stay of proceedings. No criminal record.
Charge: Assault (Spousal).
Issue: Whether it was in the public interest to proceed with the criminal charge.
Result: Despite a child being present during the incident, we were able to persuade Crown Counsel to proceed by way of a Peace Bond. Criminal charge dropped. No criminal record.
Charge: Assault; Assault with a Weapon.
Issue: Whether there was a substantial likelihood of a conviction.
Result: We were able to direct Crown counsel to important evidence that corroborated that our client was acting in self defence. Stay of proceedings. No criminal record.
Charge: Extortion.
Issue: Whether our client would be sentenced to the nine month jail sentence sought by the Crown for following through with his threat to publish pornographic images of the complainant to the internet.
Result: After hearing Mr. Mines’ submissions, the trial judge senenced our client to 60 days to be served intermittently on weekends.
Charge: Assault with a Weapon; Uttering a Threat (domestic).
Issue: Given the rehabilitative steps our client had taken, whether it was in the public interest to proceed with the criminal charges.
Result: Mr. Johnson was able to persuade Crown Counsel to stay both charges. No criminal record.
Charge: Assault; Mischief (x2); participating in a Riot.
Issue: Whether our client would be sententeced to the 6 to 8 month jail sentence sought by the Crown.
Result: We were able to persuade Crown Counsel that our client’s role in the Stanley Cup Riot did not include a serious assault. After hearing Mr. Mines’ submissions, the Court imposed a 75 day intermittent sentence.
Charge: Assault with a Weapon; Threatening (domestic).
Issue: Given the rehabilitative steps our client had taken, whether it was in the public interest to proceed with the criminal charges.
Result: Mr. Mines was able to persuade Crown counsel to stay both charges. No criminal record.
Charge: Assault.
Issue: Whether there was a public interest in proceeding with the criminal charge.
Result: We were able to persuade Crown Counsel to not approve any charge upon our client completing Alternative Measures. No criminal record.
Charge: Aggravated Assault (reduced to Assault Causing Bodily Harm).
Issue: Whether the injury was serious enough to constitute the charged offence; whether the trial judge would follow the Crown’s sentencing submissions.
Result: Rather than the 18 month jail sentence the Crown had originally sought, Mr. Johnson was able to persuade the Court to sentence our client to 45 days in custody.
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 […]
Hats off to our Ian Gauthier and all other contributors and editors of the newly published CanLii Criminal Law Ebook! Read Ian’s chapter on victim participation: Ebook- Sentencing
