The Crown sought to have a certified drug recognition expert (evaluating officer) testify regarding their opinion on whether the accused's ability to operate a motor vehicle was impaired by a drug, without requiring the officer to meet the formal expert qualification criteria established in R. v. Mohan and R. v. J.-L.J. The accused argued that while the evaluating officer could testify about the evaluation tests and procedures conducted, any opinion on impairment would require formal expert qualification unless it was solely for the purpose of making a demand under section 254(3.4) of the Criminal Code.
The court ruled that a certified drug recognition expert accredited by the International Association of Chiefs of Police may provide expert opinion evidence regarding drug impairment without a Mohan voir dire, as Parliament intended through the enactment of the relevant legislation and regulations.
The court also permitted the accused to call expert evidence challenging the scientific validity of the evaluation tests without requiring constitutional notice.
