The accused was charged with impaired operation and operating a motor vehicle with a blood alcohol concentration over 80mg after driving his vehicle into a ditch.
The accused brought a Charter application alleging breaches of his s. 10(b) right to counsel, arguing there was an unjustified delay in reading his rights and that police comments undermined his confidence in duty counsel.
The court dismissed the Charter application, finding the brief delay was justified by safety concerns and the accused's extreme intoxication, and that the accused never elected to speak with counsel.
The Crown proved both offences beyond a reasonable doubt, resulting in findings of guilt.
