R. v. Watts, 2007 ONCA 271

1The appellant raises only the issue of unreasonable verdict. In our view, there was ample evidence from which the trial judge could conclude as he did, that the appellant’s car struck the bus, that he was the operator, and that his ability to operate the car was impaired.

2As to his impairment, the principal ground focussed on by the appellant, the evidence includes the strong odour of alcohol on the appellant’s breath, his admission that he had too much to drink and blacked out, the evidence that he had alcohol in his blood, that the damage to his car was significant, and that there was no evidence that the road at the spot of the accident was slippery or that driving visibility was poor. All this is more than sufficient to sustain the verdict.

3The appeal must be dismissed.