The accused was charged with operation of a motor vehicle with a blood alcohol concentration exceeding 80 mg per 100 ml of blood arising from a motor vehicle collision.
The accused raised multiple Charter arguments challenging the lawfulness of the police investigation, including claims of delayed rights to counsel, improper ASD demand timing, and late disclosure of an expert toxicology report.
The court rejected all Charter arguments and found the accused guilty based on breath sample analysis showing a BAC of 260 mg per 100 ml of blood at the time of the collision.
