The accused was charged with operating a conveyance with a blood alcohol concentration over 80.
The main issues at trial were whether the accused was properly served with the certificate of a qualified technician and whether the evidence complied with the new retrospective impaired driving provisions under s. 320.31 of the Criminal Code.
The court found that the arresting officer properly served the certificate, noting that the accused's refusal to sign effectively constituted a refusal of service.
The court also held that the accumulation of Crown evidence, including testimony from two breath technicians, satisfied the new statutory requirements.
The accused was found guilty.
