R. vs. R.R. – Surrey Provincial Court
Charge: Obstruct Police; Resist Arrest.
Issue: Whether it was in the public interest to prosecute our client who was extremely uncooperative with police during their impaired driving investigation of him.
Result: Mr. Mines was able to persuade Crown counsel to let our client into the Alternative Measures program. This ended the prosecution. No criminal record.
R. vs. C.L. – Vancouver Provincial Court
Charge: Assault Causing Bodily Harm.
Issue: Given the rehabilitative steps our client had taken under our direction, whether a jail sentence would be the appropriate sentence.
Result: Notwithstanding that our client fractured the complainant’s cheekbone, Mr. Mines was able to persude Crown counsel to make a joint submission to the court for a conditional discharge with 18 months probation. No jail. No criminal conviction.
R. vs. K.D. – Vancouver Provincial Court
Charge: Driving while prohibited.
Issue: Whether it was in the public interest to proceed with the charge.
Result: Mr. Johnson was able to persuade Crown counsel to proceed on the lesser offence of Driving Without a Valid License. Rather than a mandatory one year driving prohibition, our client was sentenced to a $300 fine. No driving prohibition.
R. vs. M.M. – ICBC Investigation
Charge: Fraud; Misrepresentation.
Issue: Given our client’s remorse and cooperation, whether there was a public interest in proceeding with a criminal charge.
Result: Mr. Johnson was able to steer our client through the investigation and was able to persuade the investigator to not forward any charges to Crown counsel. No criminal record.
R. vs. R.L. – Vancouver Provincial Court
Charge: Theft Under $5000.
Issue: Given the circumstances of the offence and the rehabilitative steps our client had taken, whether it was in the public interest to proceed with the charge.
Result: Mr. Johnson persuaded Crown counsel to allow our client into the Alternative Measures program and to stay the charge. No criminal record.
R.vs. F.P. – North Vancouver Provincial Court
Charge: Fraud Under $5000.
Issue: Whether it was in the public interest to proceed with the criminal charge.
Result: Mr. Mines was able to persuade Crown Counsel to allow our client into the Alternative Measures program and to stay the charge. No criminal record.
R. vs. C.O. – North Vancouver Provincial Court
Charge: Possession of a Controlled Substance (cocaine).
Issue: Whether it was in the public interest to proceed with the prosecution.
Result: Mr. Mines was able to persuade Crown counsel that, given our client’s circumstances and the circumstances of the offence, that it was not in the public interest to proceed with the charge. Stay of proceedings. No criminal record.
R. vs. Y.J. – Vancouver Provincial Court
Charge: Assault (domestic).
Issue: Whether it was in the public interest to proceed with the charge.
Result: Mr. Johnson was able to persuade Crown counsel to stay the proceedings upon our client completing a program of rehabilitation and Alternative Measures. No criminal record.
R. vs. Y.J. – Vancouver Provincial Court
Charge: Assault (domestic); Uttering a Threat.
Issue: Whether it was in the public interest for Crown counsel to proceed against our client was charged with assaulting his girlfriend and uttering a threat to a worker at a health care clinic.
Result: Mr. Johnson was able to guide our client through rehabilitative steps and to persude . Crown counsel to stay all charges. No criminal record.
R. vs. S.A. – Vancouver Provincial Court
Charge: Fraud Under $5000 (x8).
Issue: Whether it was in the public interest to proceed with the criminal prosecution.
Result: Mr. Johnson was able to steer our client through a course of rehabilitation and into the Alternative Measures Program. Crown stayed the proceedings. no criminal record.
R. vs. I.R. – Squamish RCMP Investigation
Charge: Sexual Assault.
Issue: Whether the complainant had, in fact, consented and whether it was reasonable for police to recommend charges.
Result: Mr. Mines was able to steer our client through the investigation without any police detention or arrest. No charges were recommended to Crown counsel. No criminal record.
R. vs. J.L. – Coquitlam RCMP Investigation
Charge: Sexual Assault; Sexual Interference.
Issue: Whether the Crown would be able to prove that our client did not take reasonable steps to learn the age of the complainant.
Result: Mr. Mines made representations to the investigating officer suggesting that, in the circumstances, it was reasonable for our client to have concluded that the complainant was of legal age and did, in fact, consent to all sexual contact. No charge was forwarded to Crown. No criminal record.
