R. v. Alexander (D.), 2009 SKQB 21

• Judge: Allbright, J.
• Court: Court of Queen's Bench of Saskatchewan (Canada)
• Case Date: January 15, 2009
• Jurisdiction: Saskatchewan
• Citations: 2009 SKQB 21;(2009), 328 Sask.R. 241 (QB)

R. v. Alexander (D.) (2009), 328 Sask.R. 241 (QB)

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [2009] Sask.R. TBEd. JA.078

Dustin Travis Alexander (appellant) v. Her Majesty the Queen (respondent)

(2007 Q.B.C.A. No. 51; 2009 SKQB 21)

Indexed As: R. v. Alexander (D.)

Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench

Judicial Centre of Saskatoon

Allbright, J.

January 15, 2009.

Summary:

Just after midnight on a Saturday night, police officers heard a loud vehicle engine revving and tires squealing. They stopped a vehicle that they believed had made the noise. Alexander was the driver. The officers noted indicia of impairment and arrested Alexander, who was subsequently charged with impaired driving and driving with an excessive blood-alcohol level.

The Saskatchewan Provincial Court, in a decision reported at (2007), 306 Sask.R. 289, convicted Alexander of driving with an excessive blood-alcohol level. Alexander appealed.

The Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench dismissed the appeal.

Civil Rights - Topic 3603

Detention and imprisonment - Detention - What constitutes arbitrary detention - Police officers heard a loud vehicle engine revving and tires squealing - They stopped a vehicle that they believed had made the noise - Alexander was the driver - The officers noted indicia of impairment and arrested Alexander, charging him with impaired driving offences - The trial court convicted Alexander of driving with an excessive blood-alcohol level, rejecting Alexander's argument that his detention contravened s. 9 of the Charter on the basis that the police were reacting to what they reasonably thought was a traffic violation (stunting) - Alexander appealed, asserting, inter alia, that the trial judge had misconstrued and misapplied the law regarding the police power to stop motor vehicles - The Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench dismissed the appeal - While the trial judgment tended to blur legal justifications, as a whole it suggested that Alexander's detention was justified primarily on "reasonable grounds to detain" under R. v. Mann (P.H.) (2004 S.C.C.) and, alternatively, on the "arbitrary stopping power" under s. 209.1 of the Traffic Safety Act - The relatively low threshold to establish reasonable grounds to detain under R. v. Mann (P.H.) was met here - Regarding s. 209.1, R. v. Ladouceur (1990 S.C.C.) established that arbitrary vehicle stops violated s. 9 of the Charter unless they were for vehicle and highway safety purposes, including checking for "mechanical fitness, a valid licence and proper insurance, and sobriety" - While "stunting" fell within the broader purpose of vehicle and highway safety, there was no way for the officers to check whether Alexander was stunting by stopping his vehicle - This raised a critical issue regarding justification under s. 209.1 - However, because the officers had reasonable grounds to detain Alexander under R. v. Mann (P.H.), the s. 209.1 issue did not have to be determined - See paragraphs 24 to 47.

Criminal Law - Topic 7656

Summary conviction proceedings - Appeals - Grounds - Lack of evidence to support finding - Police officers heard a loud vehicle engine revving and tires squealing - They stopped a vehicle that they believed had made the noise - Alexander was the driver - The officers noted indicia of impairment and arrested Alexander, charging him with impaired driving offences - The trial court convicted Alexander of driving with an excessive blood-alcohol level - Alexander appealed, asserting, inter alia, that the trial judge made findings of fact that were not supported by the evidence - In particular, Alexander asserted that the officers were inconsistent in their testimony regarding the location of the squealing tires and the sighting of Alexander's vehicle - The Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench dismissed the appeal - The evidentiary basis for the trial judge's finding that a dark vehicle was observed at a particular intersection was somewhat tenuous, but did not constitute a palpable and overriding error - The testimony of all three officers regarding the squealing tires was consistent - See paragraphs 14 to 18.

Police - Topic 3063

Powers - Arrest and detention - Without warrant - Reasonable and probable grounds - [See Civil Rights - Topic 3603 ].

Police - Topic 3086

Powers - Arrest and detention - Detention for investigative purposes - [See Civil Rights - Topic 3603 ].

Police - Topic 3105

Powers - Investigation - Impaired driving (incl. sobriety tests etc.) - [See Civil Rights - Topic 3603 ].

Police - Topic 3109

Powers - Investigation - Motor vehicles - [See Civil Rights - Topic 3603 ].

Police - Topic 3204

Powers - Direction - Stopping vehicles - General - [See Civil Rights - Topic 3603 ].

Cases Noticed:

R. v. Houben (K.) (2006), 289 Sask.R. 118; 382 W.A.C. 118; 2006 SKCA 129, refd to. [para. 11].

R. v. Horner (V.K.) (2004), 248 Sask.R. 240; 2004 SKQB 201, refd to. [para. 12].

R. v. Mann (P.H.) (2004), 324 N.R. 215; 187 Man.R.(2d) 1; 330 W.A.C. 1; 185 C.C.C.(3d) 308 (S.C.C.), appld. [para. 25].

R. v. Ladouceur (1990), 108 N.R. 171; 40 O.A.C. 1; 56 C.C.C.(3d) 22 (S.C.C.), refd to. [para. 27].

R. v. Mackie (S.D.) (2004), 248 Sask.R. 247; 2004 SKQB 202, refd to. [para. 43].

Counsel:

Daryl E. Labach, for the appellant;

Shawn V. Moen, for the respondent.

This appeal was heard by Allbright, J., of the Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench, Judicial Centre of Saskatoon, who delivered the following judgment on January 15, 2009.