Entries by admin

R. vs. N.W. – Vancouver Provincial Court

Charge: Theft; Posession of Stolen Property Under $5000. Issue: Whether, given new evidence provided by our client, the Crown had a reasonable prospect of a conviction. Result: At the outset of the trial, Mr. Mines was able to persuade Crown counsel to call no evidence. The trial judge dismissed both charges. No criminal record.

Our Media Comments on the Jian Ghomeshi Trial…

The Rise and Fall of the “Ghomeshi Effect” BY DENISE RYAN AND MATTHEW ROBINSON, VANCOUVER SUN FEBRUARY 13, 2016 For just a moment it looked like change was in the air. In 2014, when former broadcaster Jian Ghomeshi first fell so spectacularly from grace — a sudden and very public dismissal from CBC, and a stunning […]

Rvs. G.C. – Vancouver Traffic Court

Charge: Failing to Obey a Traffic Control Device. Issue: Whether our client’s Charter right to be tried within a reasonable time was breached. Result: Upon filing the required Notice of our Charter Application, Crown counsel agreed with Mr. Johnson’s submissions and entered a stay of proceedings. No conviction. No driving prohibition.

R. vs. A.K. – Vancouver Provincial Court

Charge: Impaired Driving; Possession of Controlled Substance. Issue: Given the rehabilitative steps that our client had taken, whether it was in the public interest to proceed with the prosecution. Result: Mr. Mines was able tp persuade Crown counsel to stay the two criminal charges and proceed on the lesser Motor Vehicle Act charge of Driving […]

R. vs. J.J. – Vancouver Provincial Court

Charge: Voyeurism. Issue: Whether, given the circumstances of the offence and the rehabilitative steps our client had taken, whether it was necessary for the Court to enter a conviction. Result: Upon considering Mr. Johnson’s submissions on our client’s behalf, the Court granted our client a Conditional Discharge and placed him on probation.

R. vs. A.S. – Port Coquitlam provincial Court

Charge: Driving while Prohibited. Issue: Whether it was in the public interest to proceed with the charge. Result: We were able to persuade Crown Counsel to proceed on the lesser charge of driving without a license. After hearing Mr. Mines’ submissions, the Court imposed a $1000 fine rather than the minimum mandatory 12 month driving […]

R. vs. RHG – Vancouver Provincial Court

Charge: Attempted B&E. Issue: Whether the Crown could prove that our client intended to break into the business establishment. Result: Mr. Johnson was able to persuade Crown counsel that, despite being found on the rooftop in suspicious circumstances, our client had a reasonable explanation for being there. Charges stayed. No criminal record.

R. vs. C.S. – Vancouver Provincial Court

Charge: Sex Assault (investigation). Issue: Whether Crown Counsel would approve charges against our client. Result: We were able to steer our client through the investigation and ultimately persuaded Crown Counsel that, given the circumstances, there was no public interest in proceeding with a criminal prosecution. No charges approved. No criminal record.

Understanding Bail Hearings

Often, the first contact we have with a new client is a call from that client, or his or her relative or friend, stating that the person is in police custody, having been arrested and charged with an  offence. Two issues are certain to arise. First, advising the client that they have the right to […]

R. vs. J.O. – Vancouver Provincial Court

Charge: Impaired Driving; Over .08. Issue: Whether it was in the public interest to proceed with a criminal prosecution in this case which involved an accident. Result: Based on our client’s medical issues and the rehabilitative steps he had taken, Mr. Mines was able to persuade Crown counsel to proceed on a lesser charge under […]

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

Charge: Robbery. Issue: Whether Crown witnesses could identify our client as the person who robbed the bank. Result: Mr. Johnson directed the Court’s attention to a body of evidence which suggested that police unfairly manipulated the photographs on which our client was identified. On the 6th day of trial. Crown counsel directed a stay of […]