Justice K. L. McLeod

The defendant was charged with refusing to provide an approved screening device (ASD) sample during a RIDE program stop.

The Crown was required to prove a valid demand, failure to comply, and an intention to refuse.

The court found that while the defendant failed to provide a proper breath sample after numerous attempts, he had not formed the requisite intention to refuse.

The defendant's mental health condition, including anxiety, nervousness, and paranoia stemming from a traumatic experience in 2010, rendered his nervousness almost disabling.

The court acquitted the defendant, finding he had raised a reasonable doubt as to his intention to evade providing a proper sample.

The judgment also addresses systemic concerns regarding defence counsel competence and the integrity of the adversarial system.

The accused was charged with driving with over 80 milligrams of alcohol in 100 millilitres of blood.

The Crown relied on breathalyzer readings of 137 and 139 milligrams.

The defence challenged the reliability of the Intoxilyzer 5000C readings by arguing that the accused had unmedicated diabetes which would produce acetone in his breath, and that the acetone detection system in the machine could malfunction without alerting the operator.

The court found that the accused's evidence regarding his alcohol consumption and failure to take medication was credible, and that expert evidence established a realistic scientific possibility that the machine's acetone detection system could have malfunctioned.

The Crown failed to rebut this evidence, and the presumption of accuracy was rebutted.

The charge was dismissed.