Charge: Assault (domestic).
Issue: Whether it was in the public interest to proceed with a criminal prosecution.
Result: Mr. Johnson was able to provide information about our client to Crown counsel and persuaded Crown to not approve any charges in this matter. No criminal record.
Charges: Possession for the purpose of Trafficking; Obstruct Police.
Issue: Whether the cocaine found by police was intended for sale or for personal use, and whether it was in the public interest to prosecute.
Result: Mr. Mines was able to provide information to Crown counsel which resulted in Crown agreeing to drop all charges upon our client successfully completing the Alternative Measures Program.
Charge: Theft Under $5000 (shoplifting).
Issue: Whether the Crown would be able to prove that our client intended to steal the items she took from the store.
Result: Mr. Gauthier was able to provide information to police about our client and to persuade police to not proceed with any charges. No criminal record.
Charges: Break & Enter; Assault (reduced to Peace Bond).
Issue: Whether it was in the public interest to proceed with a criminal prosecution of this domestic assault/ break and enter case.
Result: Mr. Mines was able to persuade Crown counsel to withdraw the criminal charges upon our client entering into a 12 month peace bond. No criminal record.
Charges: Theft/Fraud Over (from employer).
Issue: Whether it was in the public interest for police to proceed with criminal charges in this case involving $70,000 in misappropriated funds.
Result: Mr. Mines was able to negotiate a civil settlement with the complainant and then persuaded police that there was no public interest in a criminal prosecution. No jail. No criminal record.
Charge: Possession of a loaded restricted handgun, without a permit.
Issue: Whether the Crown could prove that our client did anything more than briefly touch the gun while he a passenger in a vehicle.
Result: Mr. Mines was able to persuade the trial judge that our client’s actions were minimal and that his youthful age and lack of record allowed him to be granted a conditional discharge. No conviction. No jail.
Charges: Possession for the Purpose of Trafficking (MDMA, Ketamine, Cocaine).
Issue: Given the nature of the search and seizure, the rehabilitative steps we were able to guide our client through, and given the recent changes to the mandatory minimum jail sentence for this offence, whether our client was eligible for a non-custodial sentence.
Result: Notwithstanding the large amount of drugs involved (approximately 2 kgs), Mr. Johnson was able to persuade the court to impose a conditional sentence of two years, less one day. No jail.
Charges: Assault.
Issue: Given the provocation that preceded the incident, what the appropriate sentence would be.
Result: Mr. Gauthier was able to persuade the court to sentence our client to a period of probation of 12 months. No jail.
Charge: Indecent Act.
Issue: Given the rehabilitative steps we were able to guide our client through, whether it was in the public interest to proceed with the prosecution.
Result: Mr. Mines was able to persuade Crown counsel to enter a stay of proceedings upon our client completing an extensive course of counselling. No criminal record.
Charges: Theft Over $5000 (from employer).
Issue: Given the rehabilitative steps we were able to guide our client through, whether she would be sentenced to jail.
Result: After steering our client through counselling and arranging her repayment of the misappropriated funds, Mr. Mines was able to persuade Crown counsel to not seek a. jail sentence. After hearing Mr. Mines’ submissions on our client’s behalf, the court granted a suspended sentence and placed our client on probation for 18 months. No jail.
I don’t normally write reviews unless I’m unhappy, but this time I was so impressed I needed to share. Ian Gauthier at Mines & Company Law gave us prompt service and thoughtful planning about our next move
with our case. He listened well to our concerns and showed a lot of compassion when we needed it the most. We highly recommend him.
Charges: Sexual Assault; Uttering threats; assault, Breach of Release Order.
Issue: Whether there was a substantial likelihood of conviction.
Result: Mr. Mines was able to persuade Crown counsel that there was no realistic chance of conviction on the sex assault charge and Crown proceeded only on the assault charge to which our client pleaded guilty. After hearing Mr. Mines’ submissions, the court granted our client a conditional discharge and Crown entered stays of proceeding on the remaining 3 counts. No jail, no criminal conviction.
