R. vs. A.W. – Richmond Provincial Court

Charge: Assault (domestic).
Issue: Whether there was a substantial likelihood of a conviction.
Result: Mr. Mines was able to persuade Crown that there was a lack of evidence that would lead to a conviction resulting in Crown deciding to not approve any charge. No criminal record.

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

Charge: Hit and Run.
Issue: Whether our client would be charged with a Criminal Code offence and whether ICBC would breach his insurance policy as a result of his actions.
Result: Mr. Mines was able to persuade police to issue our client a Motor Vehicle Act violation ticket rather than proceed with criminal charges. Mr. Mines was then able to steer our client through an ICBC investigation which concluded without ICBC finding him in breach of his insurance policy, saving him in the range of $10,000.

R. vs. D.C. – Vancouver Traffic Court

Charge: Speeding; Driving without Reasonable Consideration.
Issue: Whether our client had a lawful excuse for driving in the manner he did.
Result: Mr. Mines was able to present medical evidence to the police officer who agreed to drop the Driving without Reasonable Consideration charge and to proceed against our client as the registered owner rather than the driver. Our client was sentenced to a fine but received no driving demerit points rather than the 9 points he was originally facing.

E.S. vs. Superintendent of Motor Vehicles

Charge: 90 Day Immediate Roadside Prohibition.
Issue: Whether the police officer had reasonable grounds to demand the breath sample that our client refused to provide.
Result: The adjudicator agreed with Mr. Mines’ submissions that the officer did not have objectively reasonable grounds to make the demand and, accordingly, found that our client was entitled to refuse providing the breath sample. The 90 day driving prohibition and 30 day vehicle impoundment were revoked and our client was permitted to resume driving.

R. vs. U.J.O. – Brampton, Ontario Court of Justice

Charge: Fraud Over $5000.
Issue: To what extent could Crown counsel prove that our client was involved in a “foreign lottery scam” designed to deprive the complainant of $65,000?
Result: Mr. Mines was able to persuade Crown that our client was merely a courier and not a director of the fraud. Rather than the jail sentence Crown had been seeking, our client pleaded guilty to the lesser offence of attempted fraud under $5000. He was sentenced to a $2000 fine and 12 months probation.

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

Charge: Assault with a weapon.
Issue: Given new evidence provided by Mr. Johnson to Crown counsel, whether there was a raesonable likelihood of a conviction.
Result: Mr. Johnson was able to persuade Crown to enter a stay of proceedings. No criminal record.

R. vs. E.D. – North Vancouver Provincial Court

Charge: Assault.
Issue: Given the rehabilitative steps our client took on his own initiative, whether it was in the public interest to proceed with the prosecution.
Result: Mr. Johnson was able to persuade Crown to enter a stay of proceedings. No criminal record.

R. vs. S.J. – North Vancouver RCMP Investigation

Charge: Assault.
Issue: Whether, given information provided to police investigators by Mr. Johnson, there was a public interest in proceeding.
Result: Police agreed that, given the totality of the circumstances, there was no public interest in approving any charge. No criminal record.

R. vs. A.W. – Castlegar Provincial Court

Charge: Possession of Controlled Substance (x5).
Issue: Whether it was in the public interest to prosecute our client who was found in possession of marijuana, MDA, LSD, MDMA and psilocybin mushrooms.
Result: Mr. Johnson was able to persuade Crown to allow our client into the Alternative Measures Program and to stay all charges upon our client successfully completing the program.

R. vs. H.Z. and G.L. – Surrey RCMP Investigation

Charge: Careless Use of a Firearm.
Issue: Whether our clients had the requisite level of intent or carelessness when discharging the firearm.
Result: Mr. Mines was able to provide police with information about our clients which contributed to the police decision to not recommend any charges. No criminal record.

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

Charge: Assault; Uttering a Threat.
Issue: Whether the Crown could prove it’s case beyond a reasonable doubt.
Result: At the conclusion of the Crown’s case, the trial judge dismissed both charges against Mr. Johnson’s client. Not guilty. No criminal record.

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

Charge: Assault (domestic).
Issue: Whether ther was a reasonable liklihood of a conviction.
Result: After considering information we provided to the Crown on our client’s behalf, Crown Counsel decided to enter a stay of proceedings. No criminal record.