The Crown appealed an acquittal for impaired operation of a motor vehicle, arguing that the trial judge improperly relied on a roadside statement by the accused to explain erratic driving observed by police.
The reviewing court assumed, without deciding, that the trial judge may have made improper use of the statement.
However, the Crown failed to meet the heavy burden of demonstrating that any such error could reasonably have affected the verdict.
The evidence of impairment was equivocal and key alleged indicators were not supported by cruiser video evidence.
The acquittal was therefore affirmed.
