R. vs. A.M. – Port Coquitlam Provincial Court

/in , /by

Charges: Pointing a firearm; assault with a firearm.

Issue: Given the context of the offence and our client’s remorse and rehabilitation, whether a jail sentence was appropriate.

Result: Mr. Mines was able to direct our client through a course of counselling and was able to persuade Crown counsel to make a joint recommendation for a community based sentence rather than the 2 year jail sentence that was Crown’s original sentencing position. After hearing Mr. Mines’ submissions, the court granted our client an 18 month conditional sentence, followed by 12 months probation. No jail.

R. vs. T.B. and M.L. – Surrey RCMP Investigation

/in , , /by

Charges: Possession of Stolen Property over $5000.

Issue: Whether police had sufficient grounds to recommend criminal charges against our clients.

Result: After Mr. Gauthier consulted with the investigator, RCMP decided to refer the case for civil forfeiture and to not pursue  any criminal charges against our clients. No prosecution. No criminal record.

R. vs. I.M. – ICBC Insurance Fraud Investigation

/in , /by

Charges: Fraud/misrepresentation.

Issue: Whether our client actually intended to make a misleading or fraudulent automobile accident claim.

Result: After consulting with us, our client provided an explanation to the investigator that resulted in ICBC deciding to not recommend any charges.  No prosecution. No criminal record.

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

/in , /by

Charges: Theft (from employeer) Over $5000.

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

Result: Upon Mr. Mines providing information to Crown counsel that our client had fully settled the matter civilly and that there was a significant chance that a key Crown witness would be unavailable at trial, Crown counsel entered a stay of proceedings.No criminal record.

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

/in , /by

Charges: Residential Breaking and Entering x3; Possession of a prohibited weapon; driving offences.

Issues: Whether it was in the public interest to proceed on all outstanding charges and whether 30 months jail was an appropriate sentence.

Result: Mr. Johnston was able to provide information to Crown counsel about our client’s significant rehabilitation plan and persuaded Crown to drop 8 counts against our client. Mr. Johnston persuaded the court to impose a sentence of 12 months’ jail rather than the 30 months the Crown was seeking.

R. vs. T.E. ICBC Insurance Fraud Investigation

/in , /by

Charges: Fraud/misrepresentation.

Issue: Whether our client actually intended to make a misleading or fraudulent automobile accident claim.

Result: After consulting with Mr. Gauthier, our client provided an explanation to the investigator that resulted in ICBC electing to not recommend any charges.  No prosecution. No criminal record.

R. vs. R.L. – Courtenay Supreme Court Bail Review

/in , /by

Charges: Extortion, Possessing and distributing child pornography, Criminal harassment; Obstructing justice.

Issue: Whether it was reasonable for our client to be detained in custody pending his trail.

Result: After considering Mr. Gauthier’s submissions, the Supreme Court Justice agreed to release our client on surety bail with a cash deposit.

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

/in , /by

Charges: Theft Under $5000 9shoplifting).

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

Result: Mr. Gauthier was able tp rovide information about our client’s circumstances and the circumstances of the offence that led to Crown deciding to not approve any charges. No prosecution. No criminal record.

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

/in , /by

Charge: Assault with a weapon.

Issue: Given the relatively minor nature of the allegation, whether it was in the public interest for Crown to approve charges and to proceed with a criminal prosecution.

Result: Mr. Mines provided information to Crown counsel, culminating in Crown’s decision to not approve any charges byt, rather, to refer our client to the Alternative Measures Program. No criminal record.

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

/in , /by

Charges: Assault (x3)

Issue: Whether our client could be released on bail for a third time, given the Crown’s concerns about his potential to breach court orders and commit further offences.

Result: Mr. Johnston worked with our client to develop a plan which persuaded the court and the Crown to consent to his release on reasonable conditions, even though our client was alleged to have committed these offences while already on bail and/or probation, and even though our client had recent convictions for similar offences.

R. vs. A.L. – North Vancouver Provincial Court

/in , /by

Charges: Impaired Driving Causing Death; Impaired Driving Causing Bodily Harm.

Issue: What would be the appropriate sentence, considering the aggravating (high speed, MVA record  & high BAC) and the mitigating factors (genuine remorse).

Result: Rather than a sentence in the range of 8 years, Mr. Mines was able to persuade Crown counsel and the Court, to impose a sentence of 40 months jail, and a 7 year driving prohibiton.

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

/in , /by

Charges: Assault with a Weapon; Uttering Threats.

Issue: Whether the identification evidence was strong enough to support a conviction of our client, who allegedly assaulted and threatened a taxi driver.

Result: Upon Mr. Gauthier pointing out weakness in the evidence relating to  identification of the suspect, Crown counsel entered a stay of proceedings. No criminal record.