The accused was charged with operating a motor vehicle with more than 80 milligrams of alcohol in 100 millilitres of blood, contrary to section 253(1)(b) of the Criminal Code.
The accused, unrepresented, defended on the basis that his Charter rights were violated through racist treatment by police.
The court rejected this defence.
However, the court found that the Crown failed to establish that breath samples were taken "as soon as practicable" as required by law.
The court identified three periods of inadequately explained or unexplained delay totalling approximately 20 minutes, which undermined the Crown's ability to rely on the presumption of identity.
Without evidence of the accused's blood alcohol level at the time of driving, the court found the accused not guilty.
