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

Charges: Possession of a loaded prohibited firearm; Unlawful storage of firearms.

Issue: Whether the warrant used to search our client’s premises was lawful; whether our client posed a risk to re-offend.

Result: Mr. Mines was able to point to potential flaws in the warrant and police search which culminated in Crown’s agreement to not pursue their original sentencing position of a 2-3 year jail sentence. Rather, the court accepted a joint submission of a 12 month conditional sentence with a curfew for the first six months. No jail.

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

Charges: Assault with a Weapon (x2).

Issue: Whether it was in the public interest for the court to grant our client a conditional discharge.

Result: Mr. Mines was able to direct our client through a course of rehabilitative counselling, and after hearing Mr. Mines’ submissions, the trial judge granted our client a conditional discharge. No criminal conviction.

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

Charge: Possession of a loaded restricted firearm.

Issue: Whether the Crown could prove that our client did anything more than briefly touch the gun while he a passenger in a vehicle.

Result: Mr. Mines was able to persuade the trial judge that our client’s actions were minimal and that his youthful age and lack of record allowed him to be granted  a conditional discharge. No conviction. No jail.

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

Charges: Assault with a Weapon; Possession of a Weapon for a Dangerous Purpose.

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

Result: Mr. Mines was able to persuade Crown that there were flaws in the evidence and that a conviction was highly unlikely. No charges were approved. No criminal record.

R. vs. M.B. – Surrey Provincial Court

Charge: Application for firearms prohibition and forfeiture.

Issue: Whether Crown could establish that our client posed a risk to himself or others.

Result: Mid trial, Mr. Mines was able to obtain a successful resolution in which our client consented to an 18 month prohibition rather than the 5 years Crown had been seeking.  Further, rather than having to forfeit the  $15,000 worth of weapons that police seized,  Crown agreed to allow our client to sell them to a suitable buyer.

R. vs. H.J. – Surrey Provincial Court

Charge: Unlawful Storage of Firearms.

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

Result: Mr. Mines was able to persuade Crown counsel to direct a stay of proceedings upon our client agreeing to a 5 year firearms prohibition. No criminal record.

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

Charge: Assault with a Weapon; Assault Causing Bodily Harm.
Issue: Given the rehabilitative steps Mr. Johnson was able to steer our client through, whether our client would be convicted of the offences.
Result: After hearing Mr. Johnson’s submissions on our client’s behalf, the Judge granted our client a conditional discharge. No conviction; no criminal record.

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

Charge: Obstuct Police; Mischief to Property, Possession of a Weapon for a Dangerous Purpose.
Issue: Given the rehabilitative steps that our client took on his own initiative, whether it was in the public interest to proceed with the criminal prosecution.
Result: Mr. Johnson was able to persuade Crown counsel to refer our client to the Alternative Measures Program rather than approve criminal charges. No criminal record.

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

Charge: Assault with a Weapon; Mischief; Posession of a Weapon for a Dangerous Purpose.
Issue: Given the rehabilitative steps taken by our client, whether it was in the public interest to proceed with the criminal prosecution.
Result: Mr. Johnson was able to persuade Crown to stay all charges upon our client entering into a Peace Bond. No criminal record.

R. vs. L.B. Vancouver Provincial Court

Charges: Possession/Unlawful Storage of Prohibited/Unregistered Firearms (x8).
Issue: Whether Mr. Mansoori-Dara’s client’s Charter rights were violated during the search of her home. His client was facing a mandatory minimum three year jail sentence.
Result: Mr. Mansoori-Dara persuaded Crown that the search was unlawful and to stay all charges. No jail. No criminal record.