R. v. Clancy, (1983) 47 A.R. 166 (ProvCt)

Judge:Stevenson, P.C.J.
Court:Provincial Court (Alberta)
Case Date:July 27, 1983
Jurisdiction:Alberta
Citations:(1983), 47 A.R. 166 (ProvCt)
 
FREE EXCERPT

R. v. Clancy (1983), 47 A.R. 166 (ProvCt)

MLB headnote and full text

R. v. Clancy

(No. 0143004614-5)

Indexed As: R. v. Clancy

Alberta Provincial Court

Stevenson, P.C.J.

July 27, 1983.

Summary:

An accused was charged with impaired driving and driving a motor vehicle with an excessive blood-alcohol content. The accused was acquitted on both charges. The trial judge held that the certificate of analysis was inadmissible, because the police officer did not have reasonable and probable grounds for making the breathalyzer demand.

Criminal Law - Topic 1374

Motor vehicles - Impaired driving - Breathalyzer - Admissibility of certificate evidence of results of analysis of breath sample - An accused was charged with driving a motor vehicle with an excessive blood-alcohol content - The police officer did not have reasonable and probable grounds for making the demand - The Alberta Provincial Court acquitted the accused, because a certificate of analysis was inadmissible where there was no lawful demand under s. 235(1) of the Criminal Code - See paragraphs 8 to 16.

Cases Noticed:

R. v. Rilling (1975), 5 N.R. 327; 24 C.C.C.(2d) 81, not folld. [paras. 10 and 19].

R. v. Hruby (1980), 19 A.R. 230, refd to. [para. 20].

R. v. Hall (1981), 26 A.R. 313; 57 C.C.C.(2d) 305, refd to. [para. 20].

Statutes Noticed:

Criminal Code of Canada, R.S.C. 1970, c. C-34, sect. 234(1), sect. 235(1), sect. 236, sect. 237(1)(c), sect. 237(1)(f) [para. 11].

Counsel:

S.A. Jackson, for the Crown;

J.J. Ogle, for the accused.

This case was heard at Calgary, Alberta, before Stevenson, P.C.J., of the Alberta Provincial Court, who delivered the following judgment on July 27, 1983:

To continue reading

FREE SIGN UP