The accused was charged with impaired operation and refusing a demand for a urine sample following a motor vehicle collision.
The court excluded the accused's roadside utterances under section 7 of the Charter, finding they were statutorily compelled under the Highway Traffic Act, leading to an acquittal on the impaired operation charge.
On the refusal charge, the court found the Crown failed to prove a valid demand because the evaluating officer did not complete the 12-step drug influence evaluation (omitting the breath test) and lacked objectively justifiable reasonable grounds to believe the accused was impaired by drugs, noting the officer fell prey to confirmation bias.
