The accused was charged with operating a motor vehicle while impaired by alcohol contrary to s. 253(1)(a) of the Criminal Code and with refusing to comply with a demand to provide breath samples contrary to s. 254(5) of the Criminal Code.
The Crown called three witnesses: a civilian tow truck driver who observed the erratic driving and followed the vehicle; the arresting officer; and the breath technician.
The defence called the accused.
The court found that the Crown proved beyond a reasonable doubt that the accused was driving the vehicle observed by the tow truck driver and that his ability to operate the motor vehicle was impaired by alcohol.
The court also found that the Crown proved the mens rea and actus reus of the refusal charge.
The accused was convicted on both charges.
