This is a mid-trial ruling on the admissibility of evidence in a criminal trial for impaired operation and over 80.
The court addressed two issues: the admissibility of a Certificate of Analyst and a printout from an approved instrument.
The court ruled that the Certificate of Analyst could not be marked as an exhibit due to the Crown's failure to provide prior notice as required by s. 320.32(2) of the Criminal Code, though its content could still be introduced through viva voce evidence.
Conversely, the court found that a printout from an approved instrument, even if produced by an external printer, was admissible as an exhibit under s. 320.33 of the Criminal Code, provided it was certified by a qualified technician.
