RECENT SUCCESSES
R. vs. K.D. - Vancouver Provincial Court
July 07, 2008
| Charge: | Hit and Run Investigation. |
| Issue: | Whether Mr. Mines' client would be charged with a criminal offence when he left his car after an accident. |
| Result: | After Mr. Mines' submissions to police, his client was issued a Motor Vehicle Act violation ticket and was not charged with a crime. No criminal record. |
|
|
H. L. vs. Superintendent of Motor Vehicles
November 13, 2007
| Charge: | 60 Day Vehicle Impoundment Reveiw. |
| Issue: | Whether it was appropriate for Mr. Mines' client's vehicle to remain impounded by police. |
| Result: | After hearing Mr. Mines' submissions, the adjudicator ruled that the vehicle should be returned at no cost to Mr. Mines' client. |
|
|
R. vs. C.R. - Surrey Provincial Court.
October 19, 2007
| Charge: | Impaired Driving; Driving Over .08. |
| Issue: | Whether the Crown had a substantial liklihood of obtaining a criminal conviction. |
| Result: | After making submissions to Crown Counsel, Mr. Mines was able to persuade Crown to drop the criminal charges upon his client pleading guilty to a lesser offence under the Motor Vehicle Act. |
|
|
R. vs. R.D.W. - Provincial Court of Alberta
September 13, 2007
| Charge: | Impaired Driving / Over .08. |
| Issue: | Whether the police officer had legal grounds to demand a breath sample. |
| Result: | Not Guilty. After hearing Mr. Mines' submissions, the trial judge ruled that the officer acted improperly. The breath test results were excuded, and Mr. Mines' client was aquitted on both charges. |
|
|
R. vs. A.R. - Port Coquitlam Provincial Court
April 10, 2007
| Charge: | Impaired Driving/Over .08 |
| Issue: | Whether police had lawful grounds to demand a breath sample which resulted in readings over the legal limit. |
| Result: | Not Guilty. After hearing Mr. Mines' submissions, the trial judge ruled the breath results inadmissible and dismissed both charges. |
|
READ THE DECISION (PDF format) |
R. vs. Y.S. - Vancouver Provincial Court
March 23, 2007
| Charge: | Impaired Driving/Refuse Breath Test. |
| Issue: | Whether Mr. Mines' client had a lawful excuse for refusing to provide a breath sample. |
| Result: | After considering Mr. Mines' submission that the police officer made an unalwful breath demand, Crown Counsel withdrew the charges prior to trial. |
|
|
R. vs. M.P. - Vancouver Provincial Court
October 27, 2006
| Charge: | Impaired Driving; Driving Over.08. |
| Issue: | Whether breath test readings and evidence of driving infractions would amount to a conviction. |
| Result: | Not Guilty. The trial judge, after hearing Mr. Mines' client testify about his drinking pattern and after hearing Mr. Mines' submissions, had a reasonable doubt and dismissed both charges. |
|
READ THE DECISION (PDF format) |
B.R. vs. Superintendent of Motor Vehicles
October 13, 2006
| Charge: | 90 day Administrative Driving Prohibition. |
| Issue: | Whether the police had provided the Superintendent's office with a reliable and accurate report setting out why Mr. Mines' client should be prohibited from driving. |
| Result: | Driving Prohibition revoked upon review. The adjudicator found that the police report did not disclose essential information, allowing Mr. Mines' client to resume driving. |
|
|
R. vs. R.E. - Penticton Provincial Court
July 12, 2006
| Charge: | Impaired Driving; Over .08. |
| Issue: | Whether police breached Mr. Mines' client's Charter right to be properly advised of a telephone call to a lawyer. |
| Result: | Criminal charges withdrawn. Mr. Mines persuaded the Crown to proceed on a less serious charge under the Motor Vehicle Act. His client received a fine with no driving prohibition. |
|
|
R. vs. S.T. - Port Coquitlam Provincial Court
May 23, 2006
| Charge: | Impaired Driving/ Over .08. |
| Issue: | Whether the Crown could prove the accuracy of the breath tests. |
| Result: | Criminal charges withdrawn. Mr. Mines persuaded the Crown to proceed on a less serious Motor Vehicle Act charge. His client was fined and received no driving prohibition. |
|
|
