The appellant appealed a summary conviction for operating a motor vehicle with a blood alcohol concentration exceeding 80 mg per 100 mL of blood.
The appeal alleged errors of law including misapplication of the evidentiary burden under s. 258(1)(c) of the Criminal Code following the Supreme Court’s decision in R. v. St-Onge Lamoureux, improper reliance on earlier breath samples, and failure to assess the reliability of the breath technician’s evidence.
The court acknowledged that the trial judge overstated the evidentiary burden imposed on the accused but held that no substantial wrong or miscarriage of justice occurred.
The evidence supported the reliability of the final two breath samples obtained after the intoxilyzer testing sequence reset and ambient contamination was cleared.
The conviction was therefore upheld.