The accused was charged with impaired driving and driving with a blood alcohol concentration exceeding 80 milligrams per 100 millilitres of blood following a motor vehicle collision.
The defence raised multiple Charter applications challenging the lawfulness of the arrest, the failure to preserve video evidence, and alleged breaches of the right to counsel.
The court dismissed all Charter applications and found the accused guilty on both charges, though a conditional stay was entered on the impaired driving charge.
The court found the officer had reasonable and probable grounds to arrest based on observations of impairment, that the loss of video evidence did not breach the accused's right to make full answer and defence, and that the right to counsel was not breached.
