R. v. Cutknife (C.K.), (2000) 272 A.R. 172 (QB)

Judge:Marceau, J.
Court:Court of Queen's Bench of Alberta
Case Date:August 24, 2000
Jurisdiction:Alberta
Citations:(2000), 272 A.R. 172 (QB)
 
FREE EXCERPT

R. v. Cutknife (C.K.) (2000), 272 A.R. 172 (QB)

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [2000] A.R. TBEd. OC.001

Her Majesty The Queen (respondent) v. Clark Kenneth Cutknife (appellant)

(00120002S2)

Indexed As: R. v. Cutknife (C.K.)

Alberta Court of Queen's Bench

Judicial District of Wetaskiwin

Marceau, J.

August 24, 2000.

Summary:

The accused appealed his conviction for breathalyzer refusal on the ground that his right to counsel was violated.

The Alberta Court of Queen's Bench allowed the appeal and quashed the convic­tion.

Civil Rights - Topic 4602

Right to counsel - General - Denial of or interference with - Evidence taken inad­missible - [See Civil Rights - Topic 4604 ].

Civil Rights - Topic 4604

Right to counsel - General - Denial of or interference with - What constitutes - The accused appealed his conviction for breathalyzer refusal on the ground that his right to counsel was violated - The Alberta Court of Queen's Bench allowed the ap­peal, excluded the evidence of the refusal and quashed the conviction - The police constable initially read the accused a proper Charter notice indicating clearly that he had the right to counsel - The police constable also went almost to ex­tremes to persuade the accused to contact counsel - However, the accused's right to counsel was not explained to him after his coun­sel of choice could not be reached, contrary to R. v. Prosper (S.C.C.).

Civil Rights - Topic 4610

Right to counsel - General - Impaired driving - Demand for breath or blood sample - [See Civil Rights - Topic 4604 ].

Civil Rights - Topic 4617.1

Right to counsel - General - Notice of - Sufficiency of - [See Civil Rights - Topic 4604 ].

Cases Noticed:

R. v. Dwernychuk (M.K.) (1992), 135 A.R. 31; 33 W.A.C. 31; 77 C.C.C.(3d) 385 (C.A.), leave to appeal refused (1993), 151 N.R. 400; 141 A.R. 317; 46 W.A.C. 317; 79 C.C.C.(3d) (vi) (S.C.C.), refd to. [para. 3].

R. v. Mide (E.B.) (1998), 233 A.R. 84 (Prov. Ct.), refd to. [para. 5].

R. v. Prosper, [1994] 3 S.C.R. 236; 172 N.R. 161; 133 N.S.R.(2d) 321; 380 A.P.R. 321; 92 C.C.C.(3d) 353; 118 D.L.R.(4th) 154; 33 C.R.(4th) 85; 6 M.V.R.(3d) 181, refd to. [para. 10].

R. v. Lavallee (N.) (1999), 256 A.R. 346 (Prov. Ct.), refd to. [para. 23].

Counsel:

A. Tralenberg, for the appellant;

D.A. Labrenz, for the respondent.

This appeal was heard and granted on August 24, 2000, by Marceau, J., of the Alberta Court of Queen's Bench, Judicial District of Wetaskiwin. Marceau, J., delivered the following written reasons on September 15, 2000.

To continue reading

FREE SIGN UP