R. vs. M.B. – Surrey RCMP Investigation

/in , /by

Charge: Posession of Child Pornography; Luring a Child.
Issue: Even though police concluded that no charges would be forwarded to Crown counsel, our client remained classified as a “suspect” and the incident was therefore viewable as a Police Information Record. 
Result: Mr. Johnson was able to persuade police that our client was not, in law, chargeable with an offence. In the result, the record was made non disclosable. No police record.

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

/in , /by

Charge: Sexual Assault.
Issue: Whether key evidence would be admissible at trial due to police breaching our client’s Charter rights.
Result: Prior to the start of a 15 day trial, we were able to persuade Crown Counsel to drop the sex assault charge and to proceed on the much less serious offence of voyeurism. Rather than facing a lengthy jail sentence and a deportation order, our client was granted a three month Conditional Sentence and probation. No jail or deportation order.

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

/in , /by

Charge: Sexual Assault; Assault; Threatening.
Issue: Whether there was a substantial likelihood of a conviction.
Result: As a result of new information we provided, Mr. Mines was able to persuade Crown Counsel to enter stays of proceedings on all charges. No criminal record.

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

/in , /by

Charge: Sex Assault; Uttering Threats (x2).
Issue: Whether, given the information we urged Crown to consider, it was in the public interest to proceed with the prosecution.
Result: Mr. Johnson was able to persuade Crown Counsel to stay both criminal charges upon our client entering into a s. 810 “Peace Bond”. No criminal record.
             

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

/in , /by

Charge: Commit Indecent Act.
Issue: Whether our client had the necessary criminal intent for the offence and whether it was in the public interest to proceed with the charge.
Result: Mr. Johnson was able to persuade Crown Counsel to drop the criminal charge upon our client entering into a “Peace Bond”. No criminal record.

R. vs. S.T. – Cranbrook RCMP Investigation

/in , /by

Charge: Sexual Assault.
Issue: Whether the Crown would be able to prove that the complainant did not give consent.
Result: Mr. Mines was able to steer our client through the investigation and conclude the matter by persuading Crown that there was no substantial likelihood of a conviction. No charge approved. No criminal record.

R. vs. G.G. – Burnaby RCMP Investigation

/in , /by

Charges: Sexual Interference; Sex Assault.
Issue: Whether there was a substantial likelihood of a conviction.
Result: We were able to successfully steer our client through the police investigation. Ultimately Crown Counsel declined to approve any charge.

R. vs. A.S. – Coquitlam RCMP Investigation

/in , /by

Charge: Sexual Interference.
Issue: Whether there was a substantial likelihood of a conviction.
Result: We were able to successfully steer our client through the investigation. No charges recommended.

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

/in , /by

Charge: Sex Assault.
Issue: Whether it was in the public interest to proceed with the criminal charge, given that our client mistook social cues and touched the complainant’s breast without her consent.
Result: Mr. Mines was able to persuade Crown Counsel to not approve any charge upon our client successfully completing Alternative Measures. No criminal record.

R. vs. G.G. – Vancouver Provincial Court

/in , /by

Charge: Commit an Indecent Act.
Issue: Whether Crown could prove that Mr. Mansoori-Dara’s client had the necessary level of intent to be convicted of the offence.
Result: Mr. Mansoori-Dara was able to persuade Crown to proceed on the lesser offence of Causing a Public Disturbance. The Court granted a suspended sentence with 3 months probation.

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

/in , /by

Charges: Sex Assault
Issue: Whether the Crown would be able to prove that the assault was for a sexual purpose.
Result: Mr. Mansoori-Dara was able to persuade the Crown that his client did not have the necessary level of intent to be guilty of a criminal offence. Stay of Proceedings. No criminal record.

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

/in , /by

Charges: Sex Assault; Assault.
Issue: Whether Crown would be able to prove that there was no consent given, resulting in a conviction for sex assault.
Result: Mr. Mines was able to persuade Crown to stay the sex assault charge and proceed only on the lesser charge of common assault. The Crown originally sought a significant jail sentence, but agreed to a joint submission of one day (less time served) and probation.