The appellant appealed his conviction for driving with a blood alcohol concentration over 80mg.
He argued the trial judge erred in finding no breach of his right to counsel of choice under s. 10(b) of the Charter, and in finding the breath test readings proved his blood alcohol exceeded the legal limit.
The Superior Court of Justice dismissed the Charter ground, finding no palpable and overriding error in the trial judge's factual findings.
However, the court allowed the appeal on the second ground, holding that the trial judge erred in law by relying on inadmissible roadside screening device results to prove the offence, and that the breath technician's evidence of readings with a preceding decimal point (e.g., .170) did not prove the blood alcohol concentration exceeded 80mg in 100ml.
The appeal was allowed and an acquittal entered.
