The accused was charged with impaired driving and over 80 mg of alcohol in 100 mL of blood following a single motor vehicle collision.
The Crown's case relied on the accused's statements in the breath room, breath test results showing 180 and 170 mg, and circumstantial evidence suggesting the accused was the driver.
The defence challenged whether the accused had an operating mind when making statements in the breath room and whether the Crown proved beyond a reasonable doubt that the accused was driving.
The court found the accused's statements inadmissible due to lack of operating mind caused by severe intoxication, concussion, and confusion.
The court also found a reasonable doubt as to whether the accused was the driver, based on evidence that the accused was severely intoxicated at the party and testimony that someone else drove him from the party.
