The accused was charged with Over 80 (driving with a blood alcohol content exceeding 80 milligrams per 100 millilitres of blood).
The trial turned on Charter applications regarding the admissibility of breath sample evidence.
The court rejected the defence argument that reply evidence regarding the calibration date of the approved screening device should be admitted.
The court found no violation of the accused's section 10(b) rights to counsel or section 8 rights against unreasonable search and seizure.
The court concluded that the officer had objectively reasonable grounds to rely on the approved screening device fail, and that even if there had been a Charter breach, the evidence would be admissible under section 24(2).
The accused was found guilty of Over 80.
