The defendant was charged with care or control of a motor vehicle while impaired by alcohol and with a blood alcohol concentration exceeding the legal limit.
The trial judge conducted a voir dire to determine the admissibility of statements made by the defendant to police officers at the roadside and at the police station, as well as to address Charter violations and voluntariness concerns.
The defendant raised issues regarding violations of his section 10(b) Charter rights (right to counsel), section 7 Charter rights (compelled self-incrimination), and language comprehension difficulties.
The trial judge found that the defendant's statements at the roadside were admissible only for establishing reasonable grounds for a breath demand, while statements at the police station were admissible as voluntary statements against interest.
The judge rejected the defendant's claims regarding language difficulties and found the defendant's testimony to be incredible.
