DATE: 20050204

DOCKET: C40467

COURT OF APPEAL FOR ONTARIO

RE:

HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN (Respondent) –and – BRADLEY WHITE (Appellant)

BEFORE:

SIMMONS, GILLESE AND ARMSTRONG JJ.A.

COUNSEL:

T. Kranjc

for the appellant

Philip Perlmutter

for the respondent

HEARD:

February 3, 2005

On appeal from the summary conviction appeal by Justice C. J. Tucker of the Superior Court of Justice dated July 25, 2003.

A P P E A L B O O K E N D O R S E M E N T

[1] Even if the trial judge preferred the evidence of the five “so-called” expert Crown witnesses based on their ability to draw inferences arising from their past experience with impaired drivers, in this case no prejudice arises from that possible line of reasoning. All of the opinion evidence given by all six of the Crown witnesses supported a conclusion of impairment as did their evidence of their observations of the appellant and the appellant’s driving. There was no defence evidence relating to impairment. In convicting the appellant the trial judge considered not only the opinion evidence but also all of the evidence supporting impairment including the appellant’s admissions of drinking.

[2] The appeal is therefore dismissed.