The applicant brought a Charter motion seeking exclusion of roadside statements, police observations, and breath sample results arising from a motor vehicle collision investigation.
The court reconsidered an earlier ruling in light of appellate authority holding that statements compelled under a statutory duty to report a collision under the Highway Traffic Act are inadmissible in a criminal prosecution, including for the purpose of establishing grounds for a breath demand.
The court excluded the applicant’s admissions about having consumed alcohol because they were statutorily compelled.
However, the officer’s observation of the odour of alcohol was admissible as it was a passive observation made during a lawful detention and not the result of compelled participation.
The detention was reasonable and no breach of the rights to silence or counsel was established.
