This Ontario Court of Justice decision addresses the application of sections 8 and 10(b) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms in the context of impaired driving charges.
The accused, Jacques Joseph-Nicolas, challenged the admissibility of breath sample evidence on the basis that the demand for the sample was not made immediately upon formation of reasonable suspicion, and that his right to counsel was violated due to language barriers and inadequate access to his preferred francophone lawyer.
The court found that while the breath demand was timely under section 320.27(1)(b) of the Criminal Code, the police failed to take reasonable steps to ensure the accused understood his right to counsel in light of his limited English proficiency and francophone background.
The failure to provide adequate language assistance and to facilitate meaningful access to the accused’s chosen lawyer constituted a breach of section 10(b).
Applying the section 24(2) exclusion analysis, the court excluded the breath sample evidence and acquitted the accused of the alcohol concentration charge, while acquitting on the impaired driving charge due to insufficient evidence.
