The accused was found unconscious in grass near a white Mercedes with the engine running in a parking lot entrance.
The Crown charged the accused with impaired care or control of a motor vehicle.
The Crown proved beyond a reasonable doubt that the accused was intoxicated by alcohol to a high degree.
The central issue was whether the Crown proved care or control through circumstantial and limited direct evidence from surveillance video.
The court applied the test from R v. Villaroman regarding circumstantial evidence and found that the Crown's theory—that the accused drove the vehicle to the parking lot exit, then collapsed—was the only reasonable inference on the whole of the evidence.
Alternative theories, such as the accused never being in the car or being a passenger, were found to be unreasonable given the totality of circumstances.
