Charge: Assault.
Issue: Whether it was in the public interest for Crown to proceed with a criminal charge in the circumstances of our client intervening into an altercation between a nightclub doorman and a patron.
Result: Crown did not approve any charge upon our client successfully completing Alternative Measures. No criminal record.
Charge: Assault Causing Bodily Harm
Issue: Given Mr. Johnson’s successful application for disclosure of the complainant’s social worker’s records, whether there continued to be a substantial likelihood of conviction.
Result: The Crown entered a stay of proceedings on the eve of the scheduled ten day trial. No criminal record.
Charge: Theft Under $5000.
Issue: Whether it was in the public interest to proceed with the criminal charge in this $400 shoplifting case.
Result: Mr. Johnson was able to persuade Crown Counsel to not approve the criminal charge upon our client completing Alternative Measures.
Charge: Possession of Prohibited Weapon; Smuggling.
Issue: Whether, in the circumstances, the Crown would seek a jail sentence.
Result: Mr. Mines was able to persuade Crown Counsel to proceed summarily and to jointly seek a fine rather than a jail sentence.
Charge: Assault.
Issue: Given the rehabilitative steps our client had taken, whether there was a public interest in proceeding with the criminal charge.
Result: Mr. Johnson persuaded Crown Counsel to enter a stay of proceedings. No criminal record.
Charge: Criminal Harrassment.
Issue: Whether, given the rehabilitative steps our client took on his own initiative, there was a public interest in prosecuting the criminal charge.
Result: Mr. Mines was able to persuade Crown counsel into proceeding by way of a “Peace Bond” and to stay the criminal charge. No criminal record.
Charge: Sex Assault.
Issue: Whether there was sufficient evidence to proceed with a criminal charge.
Result: Mr. Johnson was able to steer our client through the investigation which ended with police recommending no chargesl. No criminal record.
Charge: Sexual Assault; Break and Entering.
Issue: Whether, given the loss of crucial evidence by police, our client could receive a fair trial.
Result: Mr. Johnson was able to persuade Crown counsel that our client’s right to a fair trial was breached. Crown entered a stay of proceedings. No criminal record.
Charge: Possession of Child Pornography.
Issue: Whether there was sufficient evidence to proceed with a criminal charge.
Result: Mr. Mines was able to steer our client through the police investigation which ended with police concluding that our client did not knowingly possess any illegal images. No charges recommended. No criminal record. All seized property was returned to our client.
Charge: 90 Day Immediate Roadside Prohibition.
Issue: Whether the investgating officer could prove that our client was a “driver” within the Motor Vehicle Act, and whether our client refused a lawful breath demand.
Result: Driving prohibition revoked. After conidering Mr. Mines’ submissions, the adjudicator concluded that our client was not a “driver” within the MVA definition. All fees refunded to our client. Our client was permitted to resume driving. No conviction. No record.
Charge: Assault.
Issue: Whether there was any public interest in proceeding with the charge.
Result: Mr. Johnson was able to persuade Crown Counsel to allow our client into the Alternative Measures Program without approving any criminal charge. No criminal conviction.
Charge: Sexual Assault.
Issue: Whether there was a substantial likelihood of a conviction with respect to this historical sex assault complaint.
Result: Mr. Mines was able to steer our client through the police investigation which concluded with police not recommending any charges. No criminal record.
I want to express special thanks to attorney Michael Mines and attorney Ian Gauthier. It is your professionalism and diligent attitude that led to a perfect resolution of my case. Finding a highly professional and affordable law firm isn’t easy in Vancouver. I will recommend you to anyone who needs a criminal lawyer.
Our client had taken responsibility for his actions by pleading guilty in Richmond Provincial Court where he was granted a conditional discharge. Upon being threatened and taunted by his roommate, our client kicked in the door to the roommate’s doo=r and held a meat cleaver to his throat. The Crown appealed sentence. At the sentence […]
