The appellant appealed his conviction for operating a motor vehicle while holding a handheld communication device.
The sole issue was whether the prosecution proved beyond a reasonable doubt that the device observed by the investigating officer was a cell phone.
The trial judge found the officer credible and accepted his opinion that the device was a cell phone.
The appellate court upheld the conviction, distinguishing the case from R. v. Mina on the basis that the officer was 100% certain of his identification, a Blackberry cell phone was found in the vehicle shortly after the observation, and the defendant did not testify to provide an alternative explanation.
