The accused was charged with operating a motor vehicle with a blood alcohol concentration exceeding 80 mg in 100 mL of blood.
At trial, the defence argued that the Crown failed to prove the screening device was an 'approved screening device' because the officer used the acronym 'ASD' and referred to it as an 'Alcotest 6810' rather than its full regulatory name.
The defence also argued the ASD result was invalid because the officer lacked notes confirming he checked for mouth alcohol.
The court rejected both arguments, finding that the acronym 'ASD' is a commonly understood term that requires no further explanation, and accepting the officer's evidence of his invariable practice to ask about recent alcohol consumption.
The accused was found guilty.
