Andrew T.G. Sadler

The appellant appealed a summary conviction for impaired operation of a motor vehicle contrary to ss. 253(1)(a) and 255 of the Criminal Code.

The appeal alleged that the trial judge misapprehended the evidence and improperly applied the credibility analysis required by R. v. W.(D.).

The Superior Court reviewed the trial reasons and concluded that the trial judge properly assessed credibility in the context of all the evidence, including independent eyewitness testimony, and gave adequate reasons for rejecting the accused’s testimony.

The court found no misapprehension of evidence, no shifting of the burden of proof, and no palpable or overriding error.

The conviction was therefore upheld.

The accused applied under s. 520 of the Criminal Code for review of a detention order following a bail hearing where detention was ordered primarily on secondary grounds.

The reviewing judge considered whether the justice of the peace committed an error in principle or whether there had been a material change in circumstances since the original bail hearing.

The applicant argued that the justice of the peace failed to respect the presumption of innocence when considering the alleged offence and the accused’s substance abuse issues.

The court held that the reasons, read as a whole, demonstrated that the justice of the peace properly applied the presumption of innocence and reasonably relied on the accused’s prior breaches of recognizance, criminal record, and deficiencies in the proposed surety plan.

Finding no error in principle and no material change in circumstances, the court declined to interfere with the detention order.