R. v. Collier, (1991) 89 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 46 (NFPC)

• Judge: Goulding, P.C.J.
• Court: Newfoundland and Labrador Provincial Court (Canada)
• Case Date: January 11, 1990
• Jurisdiction: Newfoundland and Labrador
• Citations: (1991), 89 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 46 (NFPC)

R. v. Collier (1991), 89 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 46 (NFPC);

    278 A.P.R. 46

MLB headnote and full text

Her Majesty The Queen v. Dominic Collier

Indexed As: R. v. Collier

Newfoundland Provincial Court

Goulding, P.C.J.

January 11, 1991.

Summary:

The accused was charged with driving while having an excessive blood-alcohol level. He submitted that the Crown did not prove the accuracy of the instrument or the suitability of the alcohol standard.

The Newfoundland Provincial Court convicted the accused.

Criminal Law - Topic 1374

Motor vehicles - Impaired driving - Breathalyzer - Certificate evidence - A breathalyzer technician testified that he did not see the certificate of the analyst respecting the standard alcohol solution; he did not know the chemical content of the solutions and that he did not have any specialized training regarding the chemical content of the solutions - The Newfoundland Provincial Court stated that none of the foregoing was required of the technician - The court held that the evidence did not affect the evidentiary value of the certificate of analysis - See paragraphs 16 to 34.

Criminal Law - Topic 1374

Motor vehicles - Impaired driving - Breathalyzer - Certificate evidence - The Newfoundland Provincial Court held that there was no requirement that a breathalyzer technician should ascertain after the analysis of each sample that the instrument was in proper working order - See paragraphs 12 to 15.

Criminal Law - Topic 1374

Motor vehicles - Impaired driving - Breathalyzer - Certificate evidence - On a breathalyzer charge, the accused submitted, inter alia, that the reference ampoule should have been removed after the test of the previous individual and that the equivalator should have been washed out - The Newfoundland Provincial Court held that the Crown had established a prima facie case - The possibility of inaccuracy of the instrument did not constitute "evidence to the contrary" and the steps suggested were not prerequisites under s. 258(1)(c) or 258(1)(g) of the Criminal Code - See paragraphs 6 to 11.

Cases Noticed:

R. v. Moreau, [1979] 1 S.C.R. 261; 23 N.R. 541; 42 C.C.C.(2d) 525, refd to. [para. 10].

R. v. Crosthwait, [1980] 1 S.C.R. 1089; 31 N.R. 603; 25 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 509; 68 A.P.R. 509; 52 C.C.C.(2d) 129; 111 D.L.R.(3d) 431; 6 M.V.R. 1, refd to. [para. 10].

R. v. Hepditch (1985), 53 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 134; 156 A.P.R. 134, refd to. [para. 11].

R. v. Norman (1980), 23 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 60; 61 A.P.R. 60, consd. [paras. 11, 18].

R. v. Skinner (1988), 77 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 265; 240 A.P.R. 265, dist. [para. 15].

R. v. Doiron, 39 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 187; 111 A.P.R. 187 (C.A.), consd. [para. 24].

R. v. Simpson (1982), 38 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 359; 108 A.P.R. 359 (C.A.), consd. [para. 27].

R. v. Hyndman (1972), 7 C.C.C.(2d) 36, affd. 3 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 302; 8 C.C.C.(2d) 87, not folld. [para. 27].

Statutes Noticed:

Criminal Code, R.S.C. 1985, c. C-46, sect. 258(1)(c), sect. 258(1)(g) [para. 7]; sect. 258(1)(g)(i) [paras. 12, 16]; sect. 258(6) [para. 4].

Counsel:

[None disclosed.]

This case was heard before Goulding, P.C.J., of the Newfoundland Provincial Court, who delivered the following oral judgment on January 11, 1990.