The appellant appealed his convictions for impaired driving, operating a motor vehicle with a blood alcohol concentration over 80, and breach of probation.
At trial, the sole issue was the identity of the driver, with the defence arguing that a passenger was driving.
The trial judge rejected the defence evidence and convicted the appellant.
On appeal, the appellant argued the trial judge failed to properly apply the third prong of the W.(D.) framework regarding credibility and reliability.
The Superior Court of Justice dismissed the appeal, finding no error in the trial judge's detailed credibility analysis and factual findings.
