The accused was charged with impaired driving and operating a motor vehicle with a blood alcohol level exceeding 80 mg per 100 ml of blood following a R.I.D.E. stop.
The Crown relied on breathalyzer readings of 150 mg and 140 mg respectively.
The defence challenged both charges: first, arguing insufficient evidence of impairment, and second, arguing the breath samples were not taken as soon as practicable because the police officer contacted duty counsel after the accused had clearly and unequivocally waived her right to counsel, causing an 18-minute delay.
The court found the Crown had not proven impairment beyond a reasonable doubt and that the delay in administering breath tests was unreasonable and unexplained, rendering the presumption of identity unavailable to the Crown.
