The Crown appealed the dismissal of an impaired driving charge against the respondent.
The trial judge had dismissed the charge on the basis that the Crown failed to prove the identity of the offender because there was no in-court dock identification.
The Superior Court of Justice allowed the appeal, finding that the trial judge erred in law by concluding the identification evidence was insufficient.
The uncontroverted circumstantial evidence, including the arresting officer's lifelong knowledge of the respondent and the signing of a Promise to Appear, was sufficient to prove identity.
The matter was remitted for a new trial.
