The appellant, Robert Rak, appealed his conviction for impaired driving, which resulted from a trial where the verdict was determined by a Charter application.
Rak argued that the impaired driving charge should be quashed because the Crown improperly directed the police to lay the charge, the special constable lacked grounds to lay the charge, and the justice of the peace erred in issuing process without a prima facie case.
The appeal court upheld the trial judge's findings that the Crown's communication was a recommendation, not a direction, and that the special constable had the requisite grounds.
While agreeing that the justice of the peace erred in issuing process without a prima facie case, the appeal court found no error in the trial judge's discretionary decision to deny the remedy of quashing the charge, especially since the merits of the impaired driving offence were conceded.
The appeal was dismissed.