The appellant appealed his summary conviction for driving with a blood alcohol level over 80 mgs.
He argued the trial judge erred in rejecting his evidence regarding his alcohol consumption and in finding that the roadside screening demand was made forthwith.
The Superior Court of Justice dismissed the appeal, finding no misapprehension of evidence by the trial judge.
The court also held that the 13-minute delay for the arrival of the screening device was reasonable, and even if a section 10(b) Charter breach occurred, the breath sample evidence would not be excluded under section 24(2).
