R. vs. J.P. and R.B. – Vancouver Provincial Court
Charge: Obstruct Police; Resist Arrest.
Issue: Whether it was in the public interest to proceed with the prosecution.
Result: Mr. Mines was able to provide Crown counsel with information about our clients and the circumstances of the incident which satisfied Crown that there was no public interest in continuing the prosecution. Complete stays of proceedings. no criminal record.
R. vs. T.P. – Surrey Provincial Court
Charge: Possession for the Purpose of Trafficking (heroin, fentanyl, cocaine).
Issue: Whether our youthful client would be sentenced to the 2 year jail sentence sought by Crown counsel.
Result: Mr. Mines was able to direct our client through a successful rehabilitation program. After hearing Mr. Mines’ submissions, the Court agreed that there were “special circumstances” that permitted a sentence below the usual range of 18-36 months imprisonment for this offence. Our client was granted a suspended sentence and was placed on probation for 3 years. No jail.
R. vs. C.M. – Vancouver Provincial Court (Traffic)
Charge: Using an Electronic Device while Driving; Speeding.
Issue: Whether the police officer could prove that our client had committed the offences.
Result: After Mr. Johnson conducted the trial and made submissions to the trial judge, the court adjourned twice to provide its decision. On the second date, the court still had not reached a decision whereupon the officer withdrew the violation ticket. No convictions, no fines, no penalty demerit points.
R. vs. G.D. – Vancouver Provincial Court
Charge: Possession for the Purpose of Trafficking (MDMA).
Issue: Whether the vehicle search was lawful; Whether it was appropriate for the Court to grant the Crown’s adjournment application of the trial.
Result: Mr. Mines opposed the Crown’s adjournment application and the court refused to grant it. Crown entered a stay of proceedings, bringing the matter to an end. No jail; no criminal record.
R. vs S.M. – Vancouver Provincial Court
Charge: Assault; Breach Undertaking (domestic).
Issue: Given the information Mr. Johnson provided to Crown counsel, whether there remained a substantial likelihood of a conviction.
Result: Crown counsel stayed both charges. No criminal record.
R. vs. S.T. – Richmond Provincial Court
Charge: Assault (domestic).
Issue: Given the rehabilitative steps that Mr. Johnson recommended to our client, whether there remained a public interest in proceeding with the prosecution.
Result: Crown counsel allowed our client into the Alternative Measures Program. Upon completion, Crown entered a stay of proceedings. No criminal record.
R. vs. A.B. – Vancouver Provincial Court
Charge: Arson.
Issue: Given the reliability of the identification evidence and the circumstances of both the complainant and our client, whether it was in the public interest to proceed with the matter as an arson prosecution.
Result: Mr. Mines was able to persuade Crown counsel to proceed on the lesser charge of Mischief to Property (under $5000). Our client was sentenced to 24 months probation. No jail.
R. vs. S.J. – Port Coquitlam Provincial Court
Charge: Assault.
Issue: Whether the evidence would meet the standard for Crown counsel to approve a criminal charge.
Result: We were able to steer our client through the police investigation which concluded with Mr. Johnson persuading Crown counsel to not approve any charge whatsoever. No criminal record.
R. vs. R.G. – North Vancouver Provincial Court
Charge: Theft Under $5000 (shoplifting).
Issue: Whether it was in the public interest to proceed with the prosecution.
Result: Mr. Mines was able to persuade Crown counsel to allow our client into the Alternative Measures Program without approving any charge. No criminal record.
R. vs. M.P. – Agassiz RCMP Investigation
Charge: Production of illicit cannabis oil.
Issue: Whether there were reasonable grounds to proceed with a criminal prosecution and a civil forfeiture application.
Result: Mr. Johnson was able to steer our client through the police investigation and, in the result, no charges were forwarded to Crown nor was the matter referred to the Director of Civil Forfeiture. We were able to get the 2 recreational vehicles that were seized returned to our client. No criminal record.
R. vs. G.B. – Port Coquitlam Provincial Court
Charge: Sexual Assault (x2).
Issue: Given the nature of the allegations and the rehabilitative steps taken by our client under our direction, whether it was appropriate for our client to be sentenced to jail.
Result: Mr. Mines was able to persuade Crown counsel to enter a stay of proceedings on one count; our client pleaded guilty to the remaining count and, after hearing Mr. Mines’ submissions, the Court sentenced our client to a six month conditional sentence and 2 years probation. No jail.
R. vs. J.S. – Vancouver Provincial Court
Charge: Sexual Assault (reduced to common Assault).
Issue: Given the nature of the allegation and the rehabilitative steps our client had taken under our direction, whether it was in the public interest to proceed with the sex assault charge.
Result: Mr. Mines was able to persuade Crown counsel to proceed with a charge of common assault and, after hearing Mr. Mines’ submissions, the Court granted our client an absolute discharge. No criminal record.
