Summary

Keywords

None.

Summary

Case summaries are prepared by the Office of the Registrar of the Supreme Court of Canada (Law Branch). Please note that summaries are not provided to the Judges of the Court. They are placed on the Court file and website for information purposes only.

Early in the morning of August 30, 1998, RCMP officers observed the Appellant's vehicle being driven in an erratic manner. They stopped the Appellant's vehicle. One constable approached the vehicle and identified himself to the sole occupant, the Appellant. He could smell liquor and it seemed to him that it came from the Appellant's breath. The Appellant's eyes were glassy and, when asked if he had been drinking, he stated that he had consumed one beer that night. He was asked to step out of the vehicle and perform some sobriety tests. He was told that the tests were voluntary and that he could contact a lawyer before performing the tests. The officer did not read the standard Charter warning nor inform the Appellant that duty counsel or legal aid were available. The Appellant declined to contact a lawyer and agreed to perform the sobriety tests. He was unable to perform the tests and was arrested for impaired driving. He was then taken to the RCMP detachment and breathalyzer tests were administered after the Appellant spoke to a lawyer. Both readings were over the legal limit.

The Appellant was charged with impaired driving and driving "over 80". He was acquitted at trial. The Crown appealed to the Court of Queen's Bench by way of summary conviction appeal. Before the appeal was heard, the Crown was given an extension of time to file a notice of appeal to the Court of Appeal for Manitoba under s. 830 of the Criminal Code, on the understanding that, once it was filed, the Queen's Bench appeal would be abandoned. The Court of Appeal held that the breathalyzer readings and the evidence of the failed sobriety tests should have been admitted. It allowed the Crown's appeal and ordered a new trial.

Lower Court Rulings