The appellant appealed a conviction for operating a motor vehicle with blood alcohol exceeding the legal limit.
At trial, defence counsel filed a Charter challenge to amendments enacted through Bill C‑2 but intentionally led no evidence and made no substantive argument, inviting the court to dismiss the application in order to preserve the issue pending appellate decisions on the legislation’s constitutionality.
The trial judge dismissed the Charter application due to the absence of an evidentiary record and convicted the appellant relying on statutory presumptions of accuracy and identity.
On appeal, the appellant argued the trial judge should have required a proper evidentiary record or withdrawal of the application.
The court held that constitutional challenges require a factual record and that the trial judge properly dismissed the application where no evidence supported it.
The conviction and dismissal of the Charter application were upheld.
