The appellant appealed his conviction for operating a motor vehicle 'over 80', arguing the trial judge misapprehended evidence regarding his 'slurred' speech when finding the arresting officer had reasonable and probable grounds for a breath demand.
The Superior Court of Justice dismissed the appeal, finding the trial judge correctly understood the officer's definition of slurring as 'slow and deliberate speech' and that, even if mistaken, the error was not material to the overall finding of reasonable and probable grounds based on multiple indicia of impairment.
