You are here: / All Successes

  • 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. V.B. – Vancouver Provincial Court

/in , /by

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

/in , /by

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

/in , /by

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

/in , /by

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

/in , /by

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

/in , /by

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

/in , /by

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. J.L. – UBC RCMP Investigation

/in , , /by

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.

R. vs. T.A. – West Shore RCMP investigation

/in , /by

Charge: Assault (Domestic).

Issue: Whether it was in the public interest for the Crown to proceed with a criminal prosecution.

Result: Mr. Gauthier provided information to Crown Counsel that convinced them not to approve charges against the client. No criminal prosecution. No criminal record.

R. vs. J.S. – Surrey Provincial Court

/in , /by

Charge: Sexual Assault (reduced to common assault.)

Issue: Whether Crown counsel could prove that our client touched the complainant for a sexual purpose.

Result: Mr. Mines was able to persuade Crown counsel that our client did not intend to touch the complainant in a sexual manner. The Crown agreed to proceed on the lesser charge of common assault and, after hearing Mr. Mines’ submissions, the Judge granted our client a conditional discharge. No criminal conviction. No jail. No sex offender registry.

R. vs. N.R. – Sechelt Provincial Court

/in , /by

Charge: Assault Causing Bodily Harm.

Issue: Whether it was in the pubic interest for our client to be sentenced to a conditional discharge for this offence which resulted in a serious facial cut to the complainant.

Result: Mr. Mines was able to steer our client through a course of rehabilitation and, after hearing Mr. Mines’ submissions, the Judge granted our client a conditional discharge. No conviction. No jail.

R. vs. S.K. – Surrey Provincial Court

/in , /by

Charges: Assault; Assault with a Weapon, Breach of a Release Order.

Issue: Whether our client could be released on bail given Crown’s concerns for his willingness to attend court and potential to commit further offences.

Result: Mr. Johnston was able to persuade the Judge to release our client on the least onerous conditions.

Title Here

Refine by Category