The appellant was acquitted at trial of operating a vehicle with a blood alcohol level exceeding the legal limit after the trial judge found that straddle evidence rebutted the statutory presumption under s. 258(1)(d.1) of the Criminal Code.
The Quebec Court of Appeal set aside the acquittal and substituted a conviction.
The Supreme Court of Canada allowed the appeal, holding that straddle evidence is admissible to rebut the statutory presumption, applying the principles from R. v. Gibson.
The trial judge committed no legal error in finding the presumption rebutted and no palpable or overriding error in weighing the other indicia of impairment.
The acquittal was reinstated.
