Phillip Patterson

The defendant was charged with refusing to provide a breath sample contrary to section 254(5) of the Criminal Code and with care or control of a motor vehicle while impaired by alcohol.

The Crown alleged the defendant was found in the driver's seat of a vehicle with a beer can in hand.

The central issues were whether the police had reasonable and probable grounds to demand a breath sample, and whether the defendant was impaired.

The court found the police had reasonable and probable grounds based on the totality of circumstances including a citizen report, admission of drinking, strong odour of alcohol, glossy eyes, and a stumble exiting the vehicle.

The defendant was convicted of refusing to provide a breath sample but acquitted of impaired care or control, as the court found insufficient evidence beyond a reasonable doubt of impairment.

The accused was charged with impaired driving after being stopped while driving the wrong way on Adelaide Street West in downtown Toronto with blood alcohol readings of 230 and 232 mg per 100 ml of blood.

The Crown's evidence of impairment was undisputed.

The sole issue was whether the accused possessed the requisite mens rea.

The accused testified that he consumed only two drinks voluntarily and suggested that his unattended drink may have been drugged, causing him to lose cognitive awareness of subsequent alcohol consumption.

The court found that the evidence raised a reasonable doubt regarding whether the impairment resulted from voluntary consumption, and acquitted the accused.