The accused was tried on an allegation of operating or having care and control of a motor vehicle while impaired by a drug after being found twice the same evening asleep or unresponsive in a parked vehicle with the engine running.
The Crown relied heavily on a drug recognition expert opinion and urinalysis results engaging the presumptions in s. 320.31(6) of the Criminal Code.
The court accepted much of the accused's evidence regarding anxiety, physical limitations, fatigue, and earlier drug use, and found significant frailties in the DRE evidence, including the absence of video, inconsistent handling of personal characteristics, and ambiguous test indicators.
Applying W.(D.), the court held the Crown failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt either impairment of the ability to operate a conveyance or that any impairment was caused by alcohol or a drug.
The accused was acquitted.
