2 total
Negative THC urine test does not preclude conviction for drug‑impaired driving.
The appellant appealed a summary conviction for impaired operation of a motor vehicle by drug under s. 253(1)(a) of the Criminal Code.
He argued that a toxicology report detecting only a cannabis metabolite (CO‑THC) and not the psychoactive component THC established that he could not have been impaired at the relevant time.
The court held that urine analysis was not determinative and did not necessarily exclude impairment, particularly where other evidence—including erratic driving, police observations, admissions of marijuana use, and a drug recognition expert’s evaluation—supported impairment.
The trial judge had properly weighed the toxicology evidence and was entitled to rely on the drug recognition evaluation and other observations.
No reversible error was found in the trial judge’s reasoning.
Appeal dismissed from the bench; no error found in the Court of Appeal's decision.
The appellant appealed a decision of the Ontario Court of Appeal that set aside his acquittal and ordered a new trial.
The Supreme Court of Canada dismissed the appeal from the bench, finding no error in the disposition by the Court of Appeal.
