The appellant was charged with impaired driving and driving 'over 80'.
The arresting officer observed erratic driving and physical signs of impairment, and made a breathalyzer demand.
The trial judge excluded the breath samples under s. 24(2) of the Charter, finding the officer lacked objective reasonable grounds for the demand, and acquitted the appellant.
The summary conviction appeal court upheld the acquittal, but the Court of Appeal allowed the Crown's appeal and ordered a new trial.
The Supreme Court of Canada dismissed the appellant's appeal, holding that the application of the legal standard of reasonable and probable grounds to the facts is a question of law, and that the officer had ample objective evidence to support his subjective belief of impairment.
