Mr. Osbourne was charged with impaired operation of a conveyance.
He was found asleep in the driver's seat of his car with the engine running, while intoxicated.
The court first determined if the presumption of operation under s. 320.35 of the Criminal Code was rebutted, finding that Mr. Osbourne did not intend to set the vehicle in motion.
However, the court then assessed whether the Crown proved beyond a reasonable doubt that Mr. Osbourne was in "care or control" of the vehicle, applying the three-part test from R. v. Boudreault.
Despite Mr. Osbourne's good intentions, the court found that his conduct (being highly intoxicated, in a running vehicle, on a busy street, without a reliable plan or phone) created a realistic risk of danger to the public, either by inadvertently setting the car in motion or changing his mind to drive while impaired.
He was found guilty.