The appellant appealed his conviction for impaired driving, arguing the trial judge erred in admitting breathalyzer results despite alleged Charter breaches and in failing to find a s. 10(b) breach regarding his need for an interpreter.
The summary conviction appeal court found no ss. 8, 9, or 10(b) Charter breaches and held the evidence was admissible.
However, the appeal court found the trial judge erred by taking judicial notice that the appellant's blood alcohol concentration proved impairment without giving the parties notice.
Consequently, the impaired driving conviction was quashed, but the conditional stay on the 'over-80' charge was lifted, a conviction was entered, and the same sentence of a $1,500 fine and a one-year driving prohibition was imposed.
