RECENT SUCCESSES
R. vs. R.M. - Vancouver Provincial Court
April 30, 2007
| Charge: | Breach of Probation. |
| Issue: | Whether the clamp found in the possession of Mr. Mines' client was a "tool", contrary to his probation conditions. |
| Result: | Not Guilty. After hearing Mr. Mines' submissions, the trial judge found that the item was not a "tool" and dismissed the charge. |
|
|
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. J.M.M. - Port Coquitlam Provincial Court
January 02, 2007
| Charge: | Assault. |
| Issue: | Whether, given the circumstances of the complainant's statement to police, there was a likelihood of conviction. |
| Result: | After submissions to Crown by Mr. Mines the Crown withdrew the charge. |
|
|
R. vs. D.H. - Vancouver Supreme Court
December 11, 2006
| Charge: | Aggravated Assault. |
| Issue: | Whether Mr. Mines' client, a pub doorman, acted in self defence in causing significant injuries to a patron during an altercation at the pub. |
| Result: | Not Guilty. Mr. Mines' client acquitted of all charges, including lesser included offences of assault causing bodily harm and common assault. (6 day jury trial). |
|
|
R. vs. W.B.L. - North Vancouver Provincial Court
December 01, 2006
| Charge: | Fraud Over $5,000; Uttering Forged Documents Over $5,000. |
| Issue: | Whether the accused mortgage broker, in a breach of trust situation, would be sentenced to jail. |
| Result: | Eighteen month Conditional Sentence Order. After hearing Mr. Mines' submissions, the court agreed that a jail sentence was not warranted. READ THE DECISION HERE. |
|
|
R. vs. K.L.H. - Vancouver Provincial Court
November 28, 2006
| Charge: | Production of a Controlled Substance; Possession for the Purpose of Trafficking. |
| Issue: | Whether police had reasonable grounds to search the dwelling; Whether the substance (cocaine) was necessarily possessed for trafficking. |
| Result: | After submissions by Mr. Mines, the Crown withdrew the charge and proceeded on the lesser charge of simple possession. Mr. Mines' client was sentenced to a fine (the Crown had originally sought 6 months jail) and a large amount of cash was returned to Mr. Mines' client. |
|
|
R. vs. D.S. - Vancouver Provincial Court
November 10, 2006
| Charge: | Possession of a Controlled Substance. |
| Issue: | Whether police had reasonable grounds to search Mr. Mines' client. |
| Result: | Not Guilty. The drug evidence was not admitted due to an illegal search by police. |
|
READ THE DECISION (PDF format) |
R. v. K.L.H. Vancouver Provincial Court
November 08, 2006
| Charge: | Production of a Controlled Substance; Possession for the Purpose of Trafficking. |
| Issue: | Whether police had reasonable grounds to search the dwelling; Whether the substance (cocaine) was necessarily possessed for trafficking. |
| Result: | After submissions by Mr. Mines to Crown Counsel, guilty plea to the lesser offence of simple possession. Mr. Mines' client was sentenced to a fine (the Crown had originally sought 6 months jail) and a large amount of cash was returned to Mr. Mines' client. |
|
|
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) |
