The accused was stopped at a mobile RIDE check, failed two Approved Screening Device tests, and was charged with driving with a blood alcohol concentration in excess of the legal limit.
The defence raised five Charter issues: whether the officer had reasonable suspicion for the ASD demand based on odour of alcohol; whether an informal demand satisfied s. 254(2); whether the officer's failure to wait the full 15 minutes before the second ASD test was objectively unreasonable; whether s. 10(b) requires expanded information about accessing private counsel; and whether the officer undermined solicitor-client privilege by referring to legal advice during the Approved Instrument demand.
The court dismissed all Charter applications and found the Crown proved the elements of the offence beyond a reasonable doubt.