R. v. Cugnet, (1985) 43 Sask.R. 294 (ProvCt)

• Judge: Neville, P.C.J.
• Court: Provincial Court of Saskatchewan (Canada)
• Case Date: February 27, 1985
• Jurisdiction: Saskatchewan
• Citations: (1985), 43 Sask.R. 294 (ProvCt)

R. v. Cugnet (1985), 43 Sask.R. 294 (ProvCt)

MLB headnote and full text

R. v. Cugnet

Indexed As: R. v. Cugnet

Saskatchewan Provincial Court

Neville, P.C.J.

February 27, 1985.

Summary:

An accused was charged with impaired driving contrary to s. 236 of the Criminal Code of Canada, when his car went off the road into a ditch. The accused opposed the charge on the grounds that the certificate of analyses did not contain the name of the manufacturer of the potassium bichromate reagent and that only one sample of breath was taken within the two hour period.

The Saskatchewan Provincial Court convicted the accused.

Criminal Law - Topic 1374

Motor vehicles - Impaired driving - Breathalyzer - Evidence and certificate evidence - Results of analyses of breathalyzer solution - An accused was charged with impaired driving contrary to s. 236 of the Criminal Code - The accused opposed the admittance into evidence of a certificate of analyses which did not contain the name of the manufacturer of the potassium bichromate - The Saskatchewan Provincial Court convicted the accused - The court held that the name of the manufacturer of the potassium bichromate reagent does not have to appear on the certificate of analyses - See paragraph 7.

Criminal Law - Topic 1376

Motor vehicles - Impaired driving - Breathalyzer - Proof of blood alcohol level - Number of samples taken - An accused was charged with impaired driving contrary to s. 236 of the Criminal Code - Only one breath sample was obtained within the two hour period - The Saskatchewan Provincial Court convicted the accused - The court held that where a breathalyzer technician testifies, only one breath sample is needed to show the blood-alcohol level of the accused - See paragraph 8.

Cases Noticed:

R. v. Bear (1984), 36 Sask.R. 150, disapprov. [para. 7].

R. v. Hardlotte (1981), 11 Sask.R. 200; 61 C.C.C.(2d) 236, folld. [para. 7].

R. v. Jones (1976), 16 N.B.R.(2d) 32; 21 A.P.R. 32; 33 C.C.C.(2d) 50, refd to. [para. 8].

Statutes Noticed:

Criminal Code of Canada, R.S.C. 1970, c. C-34, sect. 236.

Counsel:

Dale Kohlenberg, for the Crown;

R.E. MacDonald, for the accused.

This case was heard at Weyburn, Saskatchewan, before Neville, P.C.J., who delivered the following judgment on February 27, 1985: