The defendant was charged with impaired operation and having an excess blood alcohol concentration (BAC).
He brought a Charter application to exclude breath test results, alleging violations of his ss. 7, 8, 9, 10(a), and 10(b) Charter rights.
The court found that the initial arrest for failing to remain at the scene of an accident was unlawful, constituting a s. 9 Charter violation, as the offence was not legally applicable to the facts.
A s. 10(b) violation also occurred due to the police's inadvertent failure to fully advise Duty Counsel of all charges, delaying the defendant's ability to receive complete legal advice.
Applying the R. v. Grant test, the court determined that the seriousness of the police misconduct and the impact on the defendant's Charter-protected interests strongly favoured exclusion of the breath test results.
Without the breath readings, the excess BAC charge could not be proven.
The court also found insufficient evidence to establish impaired operation beyond a reasonable doubt.
Consequently, both remaining charges were dismissed.