• We have a proven record of success.

    Defending criminal and driving charges since 1993.

    False Creek at night

Our Successes

The vast majority of our clients’ cases are resolved favourably.

R. vs. R.V. – Surrey Provincial Court

Charge: Driving While Prohibited.

Issue: Given our client’s circumstances and the circumstances in which he drove, whether it was in the public interest to proceed with the charge.

Result: Mr. Mines presented our client’s background information to Crown and was able to persuade Crown to procceed on the lesser charge of Driving without a valid drivers’ licence. Rather than a 12 month minimum driving prohibition, our client was sentenced to a nighttime driving prohibition from 10 pm to 6 am.

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

Charges: Attempted Breaking and Entering; Breaking and Entering.

Issue: Whether our client could be released on bail given the Crown’s concerns about our client’s potential to commit further offences.

Result: Mr. Johnston worked with our client to develop a plan which ultimately persuaded Crown to consent to his release on reasonable conditions, even though our client was alleged to have committed these offences while already on bail with numerous other charges, including several counts of breaking and entering.

R. vs. J.D. – Surrey Provincial Court

Charges: Uttering Threats (x2); Assault.

Issue: Given the position of the complainant, whether there was a substantial likelihood of conviction or a public interest in proceeding with a criminal prosecution.

Result: After considering  Mr. Mines’ representations, Crown counsel concluded the matter by sending a Caution Letter to our client. No charges were approved. No criminal record.

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

Charges: Assault; Uttering Threats ( domestic).

Issue: Given the rehabilitative steps we were able to guide our client through, whether it was in the public interest to proceed with the criminal prosecution.

Result: Mr. Gauthier was able to provide information to Crown counsel on our client’s behalf which resulted in Crown deciding to enterr a stay of proceedings on both charges. Stay of proceedings. No criminal record.

R. vs. T.C.C. – Richmond Provincial Court

Charges: Assault of a Peace Officer.

Issue: Whether it was in the public interest for our client to be granted a discharge for his actions in spitting in the face of an RCMP officer at the Vancouver Airport.

Result: Mr. Gauthier presented information to the Court and after hearing his submissions, the Court granted our client a conditional discharge. No criminal record.

R. vs. F.S. – North Vancouver Provincial Court

Charge: Theft Under $5000.

Issue: Whether Crown could prove the number and value of the electronic devices they alleged our client stole from his workplace.

Result: Mr. Mines was able to persuade Crown counsel to allege that the theft involved  only 7 devices worth only $1000. After hearing Mr. Mines submissions, the Court granted our client a conditional discharge. No criminal conviction.

R. vs. M. G. – Sechelt RCMP investigation

Charges: Aggravated assault; possession for the purpose of trafficking.

Issue: Whether it was reasonable for police to seek detention and forfeiture of our client’s vehicle as “proceeds of crime.”

Result: Mr. Mines was able to successfully persuade the RCMP officer that our client did not intend for her vehicle used as an “instrument of unlawful activity” and to return the vehicle to her. No forfeiture.

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

Charges: Criminal harassment; Distributing intimate images without consent.

Issue: Whether the Crown could prove the circumstantial evidence they sought to rely on and whether jail was the  appropriate sentence.

Result: Mr. Gauthier was able to convince Crown counsel to not rely on much of the aggravating evidence and, on our client’s guilty plea to not seek a jail sentence. After hearing Mr. Gauthier’s submissions, the Court granted our client a suspended sentence with probation. No jail.

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

Charge: Assault (domestic).

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

Result: Mr. Mines was able to provide information to Crown counsel that resulted in Crown electing to stay the proceedings and to end the prosecution. No criminal record.

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

Charge: Assault with a weapon.

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

Result: Mr. Mines was able to provide information to Crown counsel which resulted in Crown deciding to end the prosecution not approve any charges.  No criminal record.

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

Charges: Assault, Unlawful Confinement, Communicating for the Purpose of Obtaining Sexual Services

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

Result: Mr. Johnston provided information to Crown counsel about our client’s personal circumstances and the circumstances of the alleged offences, as well as references to applicable legal principles, which persuaded Crown counsel to accept a guilty plea to the Assault charge alone and to direct stays of proceedings on the remaining counts. The Crown and court also agreed with Mr. Johnston that a conditional discharge was an appropriate sentence. No jail. No criminal record.

R. vs. J.L. – UBC RCMP Investigation

Charges: Assault.

Issue: Whether there was a substantial likelihood of obtaining a criminal conviction and whether it was in the public interest for police to recommend charges.

Result: Mr. Gauthier was able to provide information to police whic resulted in police closing their investigation. No charges recommended. No criminal record.