 |
CALL 24HRS: 604-688-8588 | OUTSIDE OF LOWER MAINLAND: 1-866-688-8588 |
RECENT CASES - OTHER
Re: R v. Client 1
Vancouver Criminal Lawyer: Brian E. Mickelson
Client charged with Hit and Run causing Death and Dangerous Driving
CRIMINAL DEFENCE CASE FACTS:
A pedestrian doctor visiting from New Zealand was crossing an intersection
with his daughter in downtown Vancouver. The client who was proceeding
through a green light was unable to avoid a collision with the pedestrian.
Instead of stopping his vehicle and offering assistance he panicked
and left the scene of the accident at a high rate of speed. A
motorist who witnessed the accident called the police who ultimately
apprehended the client.
A psychological report was submitted by the defence which disclosed that the client was suffering from borderline autism and tended to panic in stressful situations. The court found that in all the circumstances that a sentence of 11 months was appropriate rather then the 21 month sentence which the crown prosecutor was seeking.
Re: R v. Client 2
Vancouver Criminal Lawyer: Brian E. Mickelson
Client charged along with others of possession of proceeds of crime relating to the alleged sale of cocaine in Australia.
CRIMINAL DEFENCE CASE FACTS:
Client, a Mexican citizen, arrested at the Vancouver International Airport with large amounts of concealed money. Federal prosecutors seek to keep client in jail pending his trial.
HELD: RELEASED FROM CUSTODY
Following defence submissions, Judge agrees to release client from custody. Reported in the VANCOUVER COURIER newspaper, August 5, 2004.
Re: R v. Client 3
Vancouver Criminal Lawyer: Brian E. Mickelson
Client charged along with others of conspiracy to import heroin to the U.S.A. Extradition bail hearing in the B.C. Supreme Court.
CRIMINAL DEFENCE CASE FACTS:
Client facing extradition to the United States on charges that he conspired to import heroin from Pakistan to the U.S. Federal Department of Justice Prosecutor on behalf of the U.S. government seeking to detain the client in jail pending determination of his extradition hearing.
HELD: RELEASED FROM CUSTODY
Client released on bail pending his extradition hearing. See the related story in the October 25, 2004 issue of the Vancouver Sun newspaper.
Re: R v. Client 4
Vancouver Criminal Lawyer: Brian E. Mickelson
Accused client charged with sexual assault of an employee.
CRIMINAL DEFENCE CASE FACTS:
Employee complained to the police that the accused had fondled her breast while in the workplace.
HELD: NOT GUILTY
Following cross-examination by Brian, the complainant could not be believed due to the inconsistencies in her testimony, and the judge found the employer not guilty.
Re: R v. Client 5
Vancouver Criminal Lawyer: Paul C. Doroshenko
Accused client charged with assault of a parking lot attendant.
CRIMINAL DEFENCE CASE FACTS:
Accused client arrested following an altercation with a parking lot enforcement attendant. While the client was paying to park his vehicle, a parking lot enforcement attendant placed a violation ticket on his windshield. An altercation ensued and the client was alleged to have pushed, kicked and knocked down the attendant. Three Crown witnesses claimed to have seen the altercation.
HELD: NOT GUILTY
The evidence creates a reasonable doubt as to whether the accused committed the offence. The accused may be telling the truth, therefore he must be acquitted.
Re: R v. Client 6
Vancouver Criminal Lawyer: Paul C. Doroshenko
Accused charged with cultivating marijuana and possession of marijuana for the purpose of trafficking following the bust of a grow op.
CRIMINAL DEFENCE CASE FACTS:
Accused client charged after Burnaby police execute a search warrant of 2 rented suites in a condominium, one directly above the other. A marijuana grow operation is found in the lower suite. The owners of the lower suite testify that the resident of the upper suite, the client, rented the lower suite and ultimately set up and ran the grow op. The upper suite is found to contain grow equipment, scales, “High Times” magazines, and grow charts. The accused did not testify.
HELD: NOT GUILTY
The evidence may lead to alternative inferences; therefore knowledge and control are not proven beyond a reasonable doubt. ACQUITTED ON ALL CHARGES
Re: R v. Client 7
Vancouver Criminal Lawyer: Paul C. Doroshenko
Client charged with dangerous driving, impaired driving, and driving with a blood/alcohol content over 80 mg.
CRIMINAL DEFENCE CASE FACTS:
Vancouver police conduct a high speed pursuit of two motorcycles over Cambie Bridge ending near the city centre. The motorcycles are described as traveling up to 110 kph, swerving and nearly colliding with a taxi. The client, who was the driver of the faster motorcycle, is charged with three Criminal Code offences.
HELD: NOT GUILTY
On pre-trial application by defence, charge of over 80 mg stayed. At trial held: The officers must have been mistaken about the speed the motorcycle was traveling. Insufficient evidence to find that the client's ability to drive was impaired. ACQUITTED ON ALL CHARGES
Re: R v. Client 8
Vancouver Criminal Lawyer: Brian E. Mickelson
Client charged in Surrey with uttering threats to cause death or bodily harm contrary to s. 264.1(1)(a) of the Criminal Code.
CRIMINAL DEFENCE CASE FACTS:
Upon leaving a Surrey convenience store, threatening remarks are made toward the complainant allegedly by the client. The remarks constitute a threat in violation of the Criminal Code.
HELD: NOT GUILTY
The fundamental issue of the case is the identification of the individual who is alleged to have spoken the words, which are beyond any doubt threatening. The frailty of eyewitness identification has long been a subject of judicial comment. The complainant identified the accused through voice identification. Voice identification in this case was limited. The accused denied making the statement. NOT GUILTY
Re: R v. Client 9
Vancouver Criminal Lawyer: Brian E. Mickelson
Client charged under BC’s Motor Vehicle Act with driving without due care and attention.
CRIMINAL DEFENCE CASE FACTS:
Client driving a friend’s car, attempted to overtake a slower vehicle on Vancouver’s Marine Drive. Although there was a broken white line, a rise in the roadway effectively obscured the driver’s view of oncoming traffic. When an oncoming vehicle appeared, the client attempted to return to the right, lost control and caused a serious accident.
HELD: NOT GUILTY
Although he caused an accident, the circumstances were such that he did not depart significantly from the required standard of due care and attention to warrant a conviction. NOT GUILTY
Re: R v. Client 10
Vancouver Criminal Lawyer: Brian E. Mickelson
Client charged with sexual assault of a house guest.
CRIMINAL DEFENCE CASE FACTS:
Complainant alleged that the client made unwanted sexual advances while she slept the night at the client’s house. Client denied the allegation.
HELD: NOT GUILTY
Following cross-examination by Brian, the court found the complainant not credible because she left a note the next morning thanking the client for his hospitality. ACQUITTAL
Re: R v. Client 11
Vancouver Criminal Lawyer: Brian E. Mickelson
Accused client charged with assault following a road-rage incident at a Vancouver intersection.
CRIMINAL DEFENCE CASE FACTS:
Client was stopped at a red light. A cyclist pulled up alongside the client’s BWM and then moved himself and his bicycle directly in front of the client’s vehicle. An exchange of words was followed by the cyclist spitting on the client’s car and lifting his bicycle over the hood. The client then got out of his car to attempt to remove the cyclist from his path. The cyclist was hospitalized and the client was charged with assault.
HELD: NOT GUILTY
The evidence indicates that the driver was acting in self-defence. The defence has raised a reasonable doubt; therefore the accused must be acquitted. NOT GUILTY
Re: R v. Client 12
Vancouver Criminal Lawyer: Brian E. Mickelson
Accused client charged with dangerous driving after Burnaby RCMP investigate an accident on Canada Way in Burnaby.
CRIMINAL DEFENCE CASE FACTS:
Evidence tendered by the Crown that the client was observed speeding, weaving in and out of traffic before ultimately losing control and striking a vehicle in oncoming traffic.
HELD: NOT GUILTY
Following Brian’s cross examination of Crown witnesses and legal argument, the court agreed that the evidence fell short of dangerous driving. ACQUITTAL
Re: R v. Client 13
Vancouver Criminal Lawyer: Paul C. Doroshenko
Accused charged with possession of marihuana for the purposes of trafficking following a bust of a house containing over 2100 plants and harvested marihuana.
CRIMINAL DEFENCE CASE FACTS:
Client arrested in an extravagant home in West Vancouver which contained the largest marihuana grow op ever busted on the North Shore. As the admitted caretaker of the grow op, the client pleaded guilty to possession of marijuana for the purpose of trafficking. Over 2100 plants were located, as well as 320 lbs. of harvested bud for a total value of between $1.4 and 1.8 million.
On sentencing the prosecutor sought a significant jail sentence served in a BC Corrections facility. Paul Doroshenko argued that a conditional sentence of house arrest was appropriate.
HELD: HOUSE ARREST
The accused would not pose a risk to the community by serving his sentence via house arrest.
"Mr. Doroshenko in eloquent submissions referred to quantum physics and recent works of fiction to punctuate an assertion that complex events may lead a person to find themselves in a situation they did not set out to get into. In hindsight, one can see how they got there, but it could not necessarily be predicted either that it would have happened or that it will dictate where they will go from here. The past is not necessarily a predictor of the future. Based upon the sequence of events experienced by [the accused] in recent years, Mr. Doroshenko submits that the offence is out of character."
"The suggestion by Mr. Doroshenko that [the accused] may have been set up in the residence to assume the risk and take the fall is not unreasonable in the circumstances as related in court."
A conditional sentence of house arrest for 18 months ordered despite the magnitude of the grow operation. Reported in the North Shore News, April 23, 2006.
>> Read North Shore News Article
Re: R v. Client 14
Vancouver Criminal Lawyer: Paul C. Doroshenko
Client charged with assault of his estranged wife.
CRIMINAL DEFENCE CASE FACTS:
Vancouver Police responded to a 911 call made by the wife of the client. Both acknowledged that the marriage is over as the client was having an affair and intended to live with his girlfriend. The complainant alleged that the client put his knee on her back and choked her. She complained of ongoing medical and psychological problems as a result of the alleged assault.
HELD: NOT GUILTY
The credibility of the complainant is shattered following cross-examination by Mr. Doroshenko. The complainant is jealous and vindictive and her evidence cannot be trusted. She omits facts not favorable to her story and denies obvious truths. In light of the complainant’s demonstrably unreliable evidence and the accused’s denial, the accused is found not guilty.
Re: R v. Client 15
Vancouver Criminal Lawyer: Paul C. Doroshenko
Client charged with assault of his former common law wife.
CRIMINAL DEFENCE CASE FACTS:
Surrey RCMP attend after the client’s former common law wife calls 911. She alleges that he held her by the collar while pointing a large chef’s knife at her face. The couple were in the course of a dispute concerning the custody of their child.
HELD: NOT GUILTY
Following cross examination of the complainant by Mr. Doroshenko, it is clear that the report is made shortly after the complainant was served family court papers seeking full custody of the child. The conduct of the complainant after the incident calls into question her behaviour as a whole. Given these weaknesses in the complaint’s evidence and the accused’s credible denial, the accused is found not guilty.
