The defendant was charged with exceed 80 (driving with blood alcohol concentration exceeding 80 mg per 100 mL of blood) on December 17, 2017.
The defence raised Charter arguments alleging violations of sections 8, 9, 10(a), and 10(b), and challenged the constitutional validity of the presumption of identity in transitional cases when paired with the new presumption of accuracy.
The court rejected all Charter arguments and the constitutional challenge, finding no violations of the defendant's rights and that the presumptions of identity and accuracy operate on parallel tracks without conflict in transitional cases.
