Bernard Starkman

The accused was charged with impaired driving and driving with a blood alcohol content over 80 mg/100mL.

The Crown presented evidence from the arresting officer, transporting officer, qualified technician, and a forensic toxicologist.

The accused's driving exhibited multiple indicators of impairment including speeding, erratic driving, failure to stop for traffic signals and police signals, and physical signs of impairment.

The court found the accused guilty of impaired driving based on the totality of the evidence.

The court conditionally stayed the over 80 count due to evidentiary concerns regarding the weight of the accused, which was critical to the toxicologist's retrograde extrapolation calculations.

The defendant was charged with operating a motor vehicle while impaired by alcohol and operating a motor vehicle with a blood alcohol concentration (BAC) in excess of the legal limit following a traffic stop on the Gardiner Expressway.

The defendant sought to exclude the Breathalyzer test results on the grounds that police violated his Charter right to counsel by failing to facilitate his access to his counsel of choice.

The court found that the defendant was not guilty of impaired driving due to insufficient evidence of impairment independent of the Breathalyzer results, but guilty of driving with an excessive BAC after determining that while a Charter breach occurred, the evidence should be admitted under s. 24(2) of the Charter.