The Crown appealed an acquittal for operating a motor vehicle with blood alcohol exceeding 80 mg under the Criminal Code.
The trial judge had found no reasonable suspicion to justify a roadside screening demand under s. 254(2) and concluded the demand was not made forthwith, resulting in exclusion of evidence under s. 24(2) of the Charter.
The appeal court held that the odour of alcohol detected by the officer in the cruiser was sufficient to establish reasonable suspicion and that the four‑minute delay between forming suspicion and making the demand satisfied the “forthwith” requirement.
The trial judge erred in calculating delay from the time of the traffic stop rather than from the formation of reasonable suspicion.
Because the record did not include a final determination on the blood‑alcohol element and was incomplete, the appropriate remedy was a new trial.
