R. vs. R.C. – Vancouver Provincial Court

Charges: Assault with a weapon (x3); unlawful confinement;

Issue:  Given the random and bizarre acts of our client, whether it was appropriate for the Court to release our client from custody pending the conclusion of the charges.

Result: Notwithstanding that Crown was strongly opposed to our client’s release, Mr. Gauthier was able to facilitate a release plan that satisfied the Court. After hearing our submissions, the Court released our client from custody on rehabilitative conditions.

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

Charge: Sexual Assault.

Issue: Given the circumstances of the incident and the rehabilitative steps we were able to steer our client through, whether it was in the public interest for Crown to proceed with the prosecution.

Result: Upon providing information including counselling records to Crown counsel, Mr. Johnson was able to persuade Crown to not approve any criminal charges. No jail; criminal record.

R. vs. V.R. – Port Coquitlam Provincial Court

Charges: Sexual assault(x2); unlawful confinement; assault with a weapon; breach of undertaking; possession of child pornography.

Issue: Whether the Crown could prove that there was no consent with respect to the sexual assault charges and whether a jail sentence was appropriate given our youthful client’s rehabilitation that we were able to steer him through.

Result: Mr. Mines was able to persuade Crown counsel to not proceed on the sexual offences and, after hearing Mr. Mines’ submissions, the Court granted our client a 3 month conditional sentence with a curfew and probation. No jail.

R. vs. Y.L. – Richmond Provincial Court

Charge: Alleged breach of Conditional Sentence.

Issue: Whether the Crown could prove that our client’s actions were a serious breach of his community based sentence that warranted further jail time.

Result: Mr. Mines was able to present our client’s explanation for the breach and after considering our submissions, the court agreed to take no action and ordered taht our client serve the balance of his sentence back in the community.

R. vs. M.S. – Ganges Provincial Court

Charge: Firearms Prohibition Application.

Issue: Whether the RCMP investigation was lawful and whether the application to prohibit our client from possessing firearms was reasonable.

Result: Mr. Gauthier was able to persuade Crown counsel that in the circumstances it would be disproportionate to prohibit our client from possessing firearms. Crown application withdrawn and the seized firearm was returned to our client.

R. vs. M.P. – ICBC insurance fraud investigation.

Charge: Insurance fraud.

Issue: Whether it was in the public interest to proceed with a criminal prosecution.

Result: Mr. Gauthier was able to steer our client through the investigation by helping our client rectify the fraudulent information that he had provided to I.C.B.C. No charges approved. No criminal record.

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

Charges: Assault Causing Bodily Harm; Assault Police Officer.

Issue: Given our client’s severe mental health issues, whether he was criminally responsible for the offences.

Result: Mr. Gauthier was able to provide information about our client’s mental health history to Crown counsel and, ultimately, was able to persuade Crown to end the prosecution. Stay of proceedings. No jail. No criminal record.

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

Charge: Mischief Under $5000.

Issue: Whether it was in the public interest to proceed with a criminal prosecution.

Result: Mr. Gauthier provided information about our client to Crown counsel and was able to persuade Crown that there was no public interest in prosecuting this matter. No charge approved. No criminal record.

 

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

Charge: Mischief Under $5000.

Issue: Whether it was in the public interest to proceed with a criminal prosecution.

Result: Mr. Gauthier provided information about our client to Crown counsel and was able to persuade Crown that there was no public interest in prosecuting this matter. No charge approved. No criminal record.

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

Charge: Assault.

Issue: Whether this road rage incident was a criminal offence or a consensual fight.

Result: Mr. Johnson was able to present Crown counsel with video evidence which confirmed that the complainant had engaged in a consensual altercation. Stay of proceedings. No criminal record.

R. vs. K.Y. – Surrey Provincial Court

Charge: Assault Causing Bodily Harm.

Issue: Whether the 18 month jail sentence Crown had sought was reasonable in all the circumstances.

Result: Mr. Johnson provided information to the Crown and Court and ultimately persuaded the trial judge to sentence our client to a 7 month conditional sentence , followed ny 18 months probation. No jail.

R. vs. G.W. – North Vancouver RCMP Investigation

Charge: Assault with a weapon.

Issue: Whether there was sufficient evidence to support a criminal prosecution.

Result: Mr. Johnson was able collect information from a defence witness and represent to police that our client should not  be prosecuted. Police concluded their investigation without recommending any criminal charge against our client. No criminal record.