The defendant was charged with driving with excess blood alcohol (over 80) and driving without a valid license.
The defendant challenged the admissibility of evidence on Charter grounds, arguing his s. 10(b) right to counsel was violated.
The court found the defendant explicitly waived his right to counsel on multiple occasions despite police efforts to facilitate contact with duty counsel.
The defendant's statements were found to be voluntary.
On the trial proper, the court found the defendant was driving within two hours of the first breath test, satisfying the statutory requirement for the presumption of identity.
The defendant was convicted on both charges.
