You are here: / / Assault and Threatening Charges Successes
  • False Creek at night

Our Successes

Assault and Threatening Charges

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

/in , /by

Charges: Assault with a weapon ( reduced to Peace Bond).

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. Mines was able to persuade Crown counsel to allow our client to resolve this matter with a s. 810 Recognizance (Peace Bond) for a period of 12 months. Stay of proceedings on the criminal charge. No criminal record.

R. vs. M.P. – Abbotsford Police Investigation

/in , /by

Charges: Uttering Threats.

Issue: Whether it was in the public interest to proceed with a criminal prosucution.

Result: Mr. Gauthier was able to provide information to Crown and to ultimately persuade Crown counsel to not approve any charge in this case. No charge approved. No criminal record.

R. vs. K.H. – Abbotsford Provincial Court

/in , , /by

Charges: Breaking and entering a dwelling house and committing an indictable offence, wearing a mask for the purpose of committing an indictable offence, breach of release order

Issue: Whether it would be consistent with the principles of sentencing for our client to serve his sentence in the community.

Result: Mr. Johnston provided Crown counsel with information which, along with our client’s rehabilitative progress and good compliance with strict bail conditions, persuaded the Crown to seek a jail sentence of under two years for his role in a violent “home invasion”. After hearing Mr. Johnston’s submissions, the court agreed it would not be inconsistent with the principles of sentencing for our client to serve his sentence in the community instead of in custody. This was a significant result for our client as home invasion convictions typically result in lengthy jail sentences served in federal prison. No further time in custody.

R. vs. G.T. – Surrey Provincial Court

/in , /by

Charge: Assault.

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

Result: Mr. Johnston provided Crown counsel with information which, along with our client’s progress with counselling, persuaded the Crown to gradually relax our client’s bail conditions and ultimately direct a stay of proceedings on the charge. No further prosecution. No criminal record.

R. vs. D.H.P. – Vancouver Provincial Court

/in , , /by

Charges: Assault causing bodily harm; mischief to property under $5000.

Issue: Whether there was a substantial likelihood of a conviction on the assault causing bodily harm charge.

Result: Mr. Mines was able to persuade Crown counsel to enter a stay of proceedings on the assault causing bodily harm charge. After hearing Mr. Mines’ submissions, the court granted our client a conditional discharge and ordered restitution in relation to the smart phone that was damaged. No criminal conviction.

R. vs. W.J.M. – Port Coquitlam Provincial Court

/in , /by

Charge: Assault.

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

Result: Upon presenting Crown counsel with a psychological report regarding our client’s low risk to commit a similar act, Mr. Gauthier was able to persuade Crown to not approve any criminal charges whatsoever. No prosecution. No criminal record.

R. vs. J.A. – Vancouver Provincial Court (DCC)

/in , /by

Charges: Assault; Assault Peace Officer (x2).

Issue: Given the circumstances of our client being severely intoxicated and acting out f character, whether a criminal conviction was appropriate.

Result: Mr. Mines was able to provide Crown counsel with our client’s background information resulting in a joint recommendation to the Court for a conditional discharge. No criminal conviction.

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

/in , /by

Charges: Aggravated Assault; Breach of Probation.

Issue: Given the context of the offences and our client’s rehabilitative efforts, whether a jail sentence was appropriate.

Result: Mr. Johnston informed Crown counsel of the significant rehabilitative progress our client had made since the offence dates and persuaded Crown to not pursue the 16 month  jail sentence they had been seeking. Crown agreed to proceed on the less serious charge of assault causing bodily harm and to stay the remaining charges. After hearing Mr. Johnston’s submissions, the court granted our client a one year conditional sentence sentence and two years of probation. This was a particularly positive outcome for our client, who had a prior conviction for a similar offence. No jail.

R. vs. K.C. – Delta Police Investigation

/in , /by

Charges: Assault Causing Bodily Harm.

Issue: Whether it was in the public interest to proceed with criminal charges for this alleged assault that occured in the context of a recreational sporting activity.

Result: Mr. Mines provided information to the police investigator on our clients’s behalf. Ultimately police decided to not recommend any criminal charges. No prosecution; no criminal record.

R. vs. K.J. – Surrey Provincial Court

/in , /by

Charge: Uttering Threats.

Issue: Given the circumstances of the alleged offence and 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 persuade Crown counsel to stay the proceedings and to resolve this matter with a 12 month Peace Bond. No criminal record.

R. vs. Z.A. – Burnaby RCMP Investigation

/in , /by

Charge: Assault (domestic).

Issue: Whether the allegations of this domestic allegation would meet the Crown counsel’s charge approval standard.

Result: Mr. Gauthier was able to provide information to Crown counsel that ultimately led to Crown declining to approve any criminal charge. Our client’s Undertaking was withdrawn, permitting him to resume contact with his spouse. No criminal record.

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

/in , /by

Charges: Assault.

Issue: Given the information we provided to Crown counsel on behalf of our client, whether  it was appropriate to proceed with a criminal prosecution.

Result: Mr. Gauthier was able tp persuade Crown counsel that this matter did not meet the charge approval standard. Croen elected to not approve any charges. No prosecution. No criminal record.

Title Here

Refine by Category