Justice W. B. Horkins

The accused was charged with driving while disqualified.

A Charter application was brought alleging violations of section 9 (arbitrary detention) and section 10(b) (right to counsel).

The court found no section 9 breach, as the initial stop was justified by reasonable suspicion based on the officer's observation of evasive driving and information about a prohibited driver.

However, a clear section 10(b) breach was established and conceded by the Crown, as the accused was detained and questioned for approximately 30 minutes without being advised of his rights to counsel.

The court found the evidence obtained prior to the breach was not tainted by the subsequent violation, as the connection was too tenuous.

The accused was convicted of driving while disqualified.

A sentence reduction was imposed as a remedy for the Charter violation.

The accused was charged with impaired driving following a roadside stop.

A police officer received a report that the accused appeared intoxicated at a drive-through window, stopped the vehicle, and requested a roadside screening device (ASD) test.

The ASD arrived approximately 15 minutes later, and the test was administered 18 minutes after the initial stop.

The accused was not advised of his right to counsel until after failing the ASD test.

The Crown sought to rely on breath test evidence showing a blood-alcohol concentration of 160 mg per 100 mL of blood.

The defence challenged the admissibility of the evidence on multiple grounds, including that the ASD demand and test were not made "forthwith" as required by statute, and that the breath tests were not taken "as soon as practicable" as required to trigger the evidentiary presumption of identity.

The accused was arrested for impaired driving and held in police custody for approximately 16 hours, with the investigation completed prior to 6:30 pm.

Although the initial decision to delay her release was reasonable, the court found that the accused was not reassessed for release as the hours passed, resulting in an unlawful and arbitrary detention.

The accused was held in harsh conditions in a cold cell without adequate bedding or clothing, and was denied food and water for extended periods.

The court found a breach of section 9 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and imposed a remedy of pre-trial custody credit for time served plus a nominal $1 fine in satisfaction of the statutory minimum penalty, along with a mandatory one-year driving prohibition.