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.

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

Charge: Assault with a weapon.

Issue: Whether there was a substantial likelihood of a conviction.

Result: Mr. Mines was able to provide information to Crown counsel which resulted in Crown deciding to end the prosecution not approve any charges.  No criminal record.

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

Charges: Assault, Unlawful Confinement, Communicating for the Purpose of Obtaining Sexual Services

Issues: 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 information to Crown counsel about our client’s personal circumstances and the circumstances of the alleged offences, as well as references to applicable legal principles, which persuaded Crown counsel to accept a guilty plea to the Assault charge alone and to direct stays of proceedings on the remaining counts. The Crown and court also agreed with Mr. Johnston that a conditional discharge was an appropriate sentence. No jail. No criminal record.

R. vs. J.L. – UBC RCMP Investigation

Charges: Assault.

Issue: Whether there was a substantial likelihood of obtaining a criminal conviction and whether it was in the public interest for police to recommend charges.

Result: Mr. Gauthier was able to provide information to police whic resulted in police closing their investigation. No charges recommended. No criminal record.

R. vs. N.R. – Sechelt Provincial Court

Charge: Assault Causing Bodily Harm.

Issue: Whether it was in the pubic interest for our client to be sentenced to a conditional discharge for this offence which resulted in a serious facial cut to the complainant.

Result: Mr. Mines was able to steer our client through a course of rehabilitation and, after hearing Mr. Mines’ submissions, the Judge granted our client a conditional discharge. No conviction. No jail.