Entries by Mike Mines

R. vs. V.B. – Vancouver Provincial Court

.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

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

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

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. E.K. – Vancouver Provincial Court

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.

S.K.

Mr. Gauthier is incredibly responsible and truly cared about my girlfriend’s case and a speedy resolution. He helped us achieve a very satisfying result, Crown didn’t approve the charges. Overall, I would recommend him to anyone who is trying to find a criminal lawyer. Mr. Gauthier, please accept our deepest appreciation.
-S.K.

R. vs. J.S. – Surrey Provincial Court

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 tp 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.