R. v. Coyle (C.), 2003 NSPC 35

• Judge: Batiot, P.C.J.
• Court: Provincial Court of Nova Scotia (Canada)
• Case Date: July 15, 2003
• Jurisdiction: Nova Scotia
• Citations: 2003 NSPC 35;(2003), 216 N.S.R.(2d) 270 (PC)

R. v. Coyle (C.) (2003), 216 N.S.R.(2d) 270 (PC);

 680 A.P.R. 270

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [2003] N.S.R.(2d) TBEd. AU.051

Her Majesty the Queen v. Catherine Coyle

(1249400, 1256891; 2003 NSPC 35)

Indexed As: R. v. Coyle (C.)

Nova Scotia Provincial Court

Batiot, P.C.J.

July 15, 2003.

Summary:

The accused was charged with failure to provide a breath sample and driving while her licence was suspended.

The Nova Scotia Provincial Court convicted the accused.

Civil Rights - Topic 4610

Right to counsel - General - Impaired driving (incl. demand for breath or blood sample) - The accused was intercepted by a police officer while driving her car - The accused was informed of her right to counsel - The accused did not contact a lawyer - The officer brought the accused to the police station to administer a breathalyzer test - The breathalyzer was not working - The officer brought the accused to another police station, where a breathalyzer was in working order - The police officer did not advise the accused of her right to counsel again - The Nova Scotia Provincial Court held that a further recitation of the right to counsel was unnecessary - The demand was the same and there was no change in the jeopardy in which the accused found herself - See paragraph 24.

Criminal Law - Topic 1374

Offences against person and reputation - Motor vehicles - Impaired driving - Breathalyzer or blood sample - Evidence and certificate evidence (incl. evidence tending to show) - The accused was intercepted by a police officer while driving her car - The officer brought the accused to the police station to administer a breathalyzer test - The accused argued that the Crown had not adduced sufficient evidence to establish the rebuttable presumption that the police officer was a qualified technician - The Nova Scotia Provincial Court rejected the argument - The officer was a member of the RCMP who had administered the test over 200 times in seven years - The accused did not question the officer's qualifications that night - See paragraphs 12 to 19.

Criminal Law - Topic 1374

Offences against person and reputation - Motor vehicles - Impaired driving - Breathalyzer or blood sample - Evidence and certificate evidence (incl. evidence tending to show) - The accused was intercepted by a police officer while driving her car - The officer brought the accused to the police station to administer a breathalyzer test - The breathalyzer was not in working order - The officer brought the accused to another police station, 35 minutes away, where a breathalyzer was in working order - The Nova Scotia Provincial Court found that the offer to the accused to provide a breath sample was made as soon as practicable given the circumstances of that night - See paragraph 20.

Criminal Law - Topic 1377

Offences against person and reputation - Motor vehicles - Impaired driving - Breathalyzer or blood sample - Refusal to provide sample - A police officer saw the accused walking unsteadily to her car - The officer warned the accused that she should not drive her car - The officer later intercepted the accused driving her car - The officer brought the accused to the police station to administer the breathalyzer test - The test was attempted seven times - The accused was not blowing but simply appeared to be blowing - The accused indicated that she would "blow now" upon further request - The officer charged her with failure to provide a sample - The Nova Scotia Provincial Court found that the offence had been committed before the accused's final offer and entered a conviction - See paragraphs 21 to 23.

Cases Noticed:

R. v. LeBlanc (1972), 4 N.S.R.(2d) 29; 7 C.C.C.(2d) 525 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 14].

R. v. Zinck (C.W.) (2003), 214 N.S.R.(2d) 328; 671 A.P.R. 328 (Prov. Ct.), refd to. [para. 15].

R. v. Belzberg (1961), 131 C.C.C. 281 (S.C.C.), refd to. [para. 16].

R. v. Leveque (1985), 22 C.C.C.(3d) 559; 37 M.V.R. 166 (B.C.C.A.), refd to. [para. 21].

R. v. Fillier (S.) (1995), 132 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 339; 410 A.P.R. 339 (Nfld. T.D.), refd to. [para. 21].

R. v. Bowman (1978), 25 N.S.R.(2d) 716; 36 A.P.R. 716; 40 C.C.C.(2d) 525 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 23].

R. v. Wagstaff (1988), 85 N.S.R.(2d) 77; 216 A.P.R. 77 (Prov. Ct.), refd to. [para. 23].

R. v. Black, [1989] 2 S.C.R. 138; 98 N.R. 281; 93 N.S.R.(2d) 35; 242 A.P.R. 35, refd to. [para. 24].

Authors and Works Noticed:

Phipson on Evidence (10th Ed. 1963), p. 150, para. 326 [para. 17].

Counsel:

R. Michie, for the Crown;

D. MacLeod, for the accused.

This case was heard on May 15 and 20, 2003, in Digby, Nova Scotia, by Batiot, P.C.J., of the Nova Scotia Provincial Court, who delivered the following judgment on July 15, 2003.