RECENT SUCCESSES
R. vs. A. C. - Surrey Provincial Court
June 09, 2010
| Charge: | Theft Under $5000 (Shoplifting). |
| Issue: | Whether, given the circumstances, it was in the public interst to proceed with the criminal charge. |
| Result: | Mr. Mines was able to persuade Crown Counsel to allow his client into the Alternative Measures. Upon completion of the program, Crown entered a Stay of Proceedings. No criminal record. |
|
|
R. vs.R. L. - Vancouver Provincial Court
May 27, 2010
| Charge: | Fraud / Theft Under $5000 ( from Employer). |
| Issue: | Whether it was appropriate for the court to grant Mr. Mines' client a Discharge in this "breach of trust" situation. |
| Result: | The Crown sought a conviction through a Conditional Sentence Order, but after hearing Mr.Mines' submissions on his client's behalf, the court granted Mr. Mines' client a Conditional Dischchrge. No criminal conviction. |
|
|
R. vs. S.M. - Williams Lake Supreme Court
May 21, 2010
| Charge: | Production of Marijuana; Possession for the Purpose of Trafficking (Marijuana). |
| Issue: | Whether police breached Mr. Mines' clients' Charter rights prior to obtaining a confession from him with respect to his invovement in a 5,000 plant grow-operation. |
| Result: | On the 5th day of trial, after Mr. Mines had vigorously cross-examined police witnesses, Crown Counsel offered a satisfactory resolution by way of plea bargain. The Crown had originally sought a two year jail sentence, but significantly downgraded its position to a 12 month Conditional Sentence Order with no house arrest, no electronic monitoring and no probation. |
|
|
R. vs. R.S.B. - Surrey Provincial Court
May 12, 2010
| Charge: | Forcible Entry; Assault with a Weapon (x2). |
| Issue: | Whether it was in the public interest to proceed with the charges in this domestic violence case. |
| Result: | Given the steps Mr.Mines' client had taken to rehabilitate himself, Mr. Mines was able to persuade Crown Counsel to enter a Stay of Proceedings prio to the trial date. No criminal record. |
|
|
R. vs. R.G. - Vancouver Provincial Court
April 29, 2010
| Charge: | Production of Marijuana; PPT Marijuana. |
| Issue: | Whether the marijuana plants were produced for a commercial purpose or were for personal use. |
| Result: | After hearing Mr. Mines' submissions on his client's behalf, the trial judge agreed that the marijuana was for personal use. Suspended Sentence. No jail. |
|
|
R. vs. S.S. - Vancouver Provincial Court
April 12, 2010
| Charge: | Uttering a Threat. |
| Issue: | Whether it was in the public interset to proceed with the criminal charge. |
| Result: | The Crown had originally sought a jail sentence but Mr. Mines was able to persuade Crown Counsel to Stay the Proceedings upon his client entering into a "Peace Bond". No jail. No criminal record. |
|
|
R. v. L.P. - Vancouver Provincial Court
April 07, 2010
| Charge: | Fraudulent Concealment (x 5). |
| Issue: | What was the appropriate disposition for Mr. Mines' client who had surrendered herself on a Canada-wide warrant for her role in an identity theft scheme. |
| Result: | The Crown had originally sought a 2 year jail sentence. After considering Mr. Mines' representations, Crown and defence made a joint submission which the Court accepted. Two year suspended sentence. No jail. |
|
|
R. vs. G.B. - Vancouver Provincial Court
April 01, 2010
| Charge: | Possession for the purpose of Trafficking ( Ecstacy & Marijuana) |
| Issue: | Whether, in the circumstaces, the drugs could have been possessed for personal use. |
| Result: | After considering Mr. Mines' representations, Crown Counsel downgraded the charge to simple possession. After hearing Mr. Mines' submissions, the judge granted his client a Conditional Discharge rather than the jail sentence originally sought. |
|
|
R. vs. L.M. - Kamloops Provincial Court
March 30, 2010
| Charge: | Driving While Prohibited. |
| Issue: | Whether Mr. Mines' client had knowledge that he had been prohibited from driving. |
| Result: | Mr. Mines was able to persuade Crown Counsel to proceed on the lesser charge of driving without a driver's licence. Rather than the mandatory jail sentence originally sought, Mr. Mines' client recived a $300 fine. No driving prohibition. No jail. |
|
|
R. vs. J. L. - Richmond Provincial Court
March 25, 2010
| Charge: | Trafficking (Cocaine). |
| Issue: | Whether, in the circumstances of a "dial-a-dope" scheme, Mr. Mines' client would receive a jail sentence. |
| Result: | After hearing Mr. Mines' submissions, the trial judge granted Mr. Mines' client a 9 month Conditional Sentence. No jail. |
|
|
