The accused was charged with driving while disqualified and driving with an excess blood alcohol concentration.
The accused challenged the lawfulness of the traffic stop, the search of the vehicle, and the adequacy of Charter rights warnings, particularly regarding the right to counsel upon a change in jeopardy.
The court found the traffic stop was lawful based on reasonable suspicion and independent authority under the Highway Traffic Act.
Although the court found a violation of the right to counsel upon the change of jeopardy, the breath readings were admitted under section 24(2) of the Charter based on the minimal seriousness of the violation and the societal interest in adjudication on the merits.
The accused was found guilty of both charges.
