The accused was charged with impaired operation and operating a conveyance with a blood alcohol concentration over 80mg.
The accused brought a Charter application alleging breaches of his ss. 8, 9, 10(a), and 10(b) rights due to the officer's failure to make an approved screening device (ASD) demand promptly and failure to provide rights to counsel at the roadside.
The court dismissed the Charter application, finding that the accused's own actions of repeatedly exiting his vehicle allowed the officer to form grounds for an impaired driving arrest before an ASD test could be administered.
The court found the accused guilty of both charges based on the cumulative evidence of impairment, entering a conditional stay on the impaired operation conviction.
