The accused was charged with operation of a motor vehicle with a blood alcohol concentration exceeding the legal limit following a single motor vehicle collision on July 30, 2017.
The Crown called three witnesses and filed a toxicology report.
The defence raised four issues: (1) the admission that the accused was the driver was obtained in violation of section 7 Charter rights as a compelled statement under the Highway Traffic Act; (2) the accused did not waive rights to counsel under section 10(b); (3) the Crown failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the accused operated a motor vehicle; and (4) there was no proof the accused operated the vehicle after 3:15 hours per expert opinion.
The court found that the accused's self-identification as the driver was a statutorily compelled statement under the Highway Traffic Act and must be excluded.
Without this identification, the ASD demand was unlawful and the breath test must be excluded.
The court excluded the breath samples and acquitted the accused.
