2 total
Charter application failed; impaired driving and Over 80 convictions entered.
Following a motor vehicle collision, the accused was tried on impaired operation and Over 80 charges and brought a Charter application alleging breaches of ss. 8, 9, and 10(b).
The court held that the arresting officer had reasonable and probable grounds to arrest for impaired operation and to make a breath demand based on red, glossy, bloodshot eyes, disorientation, odour of alcohol, and beer cans in the vehicle.
The court further held that an 11-minute delay in advising the accused of his right to counsel in Punjabi was justified by officer safety, pat-down, custody-transfer, and collision-scene management concerns, and that police did not breach the right to counsel of choice by failing to facilitate contact with the accused's brother where the reason for that request was not disclosed.
The application to exclude the breath samples was dismissed, and findings of guilt were entered on both counts.
Evidence of firearm and drugs excluded after court finds warrantless search was influenced by implicit racial profiling.
The applicant, a Black man, was stopped by police for allegedly using a hand-held device while driving.
After smelling cannabis, the officers searched the applicant and his vehicle, discovering a loaded handgun and drugs.
The applicant brought a Charter motion alleging arbitrary detention and unreasonable search based on racial profiling.
The court found the initial traffic stop was lawful under the Highway Traffic Act and did not violate section 9.
However, the court concluded that the subsequent safety search was not objectively justified and was influenced by implicit racial bias, violating section 8.
Applying the Grant framework, the court excluded the firearm and drugs under section 24(2) of the Charter.
