The appellant appealed summary conviction offences for impaired operation and having care or control of a motor vehicle with blood alcohol exceeding the legal limit.
The appellant had been found asleep in the driver’s seat of his parked truck and argued he intended only to sleep and drive later after sobering up, thereby rebutting the statutory presumption of care or control under s. 258(1)(a) of the Criminal Code.
Relying on Supreme Court of Canada authority interpreting the requirement of a realistic risk of danger, the court held that a stated intention to drive later does not automatically rebut the presumption.
Even without a contemporaneous intention to drive, a realistic risk of danger may arise where an intoxicated person remains in a position to set the vehicle in motion.
The court concluded the presumption was not rebutted and upheld the conviction.
