R. v. Doucet (S.G.),

• Jurisdiction: New Brunswick
• Judge: LeBlanc, J.
• Neutral Citation: 2010 NBPC 18
• Court: Provincial Court of New Brunswick (Canada)
• Date: 29 December 2009

R. v. Doucet (S.G.) (2010), 358 N.B.R.(2d) 172 (PC);

    358 R.N.-B.(2e) 172; 924 A.P.R. 172

MLB headnote and full text

Sommaire et texte intégral

[French language version only]

[Version en langue française seulement]

.........................

Temp. Cite: [2010] N.B.R.(2d) TBEd. AP.027

Renvoi temp.: [2010] N.B.R.(2d) TBEd. AP.027

Sa Majesté le Reine v. Stéphane George Doucet

(04068311; 2010 NBPC 18; 2010 NBCP 18)

Indexed As: R. v. Doucet (S.G.)

Répertorié: R. v. Doucet (S.G.)

New Brunswick Provincial Court

LeBlanc, J.

April 16, 2010.

Summary:

Résumé:

The accused was charged with impaired driving and driving while having an excessive blood-alcohol level. He moved for an order excluding the certificate of analysis under s. 24(2) of the Charter as a result of violations of his ss. 7, 8, 9 and 10(b) Charter rights. The Crown conceded that the accused's Charter rights had been violated where there was a 13 minute delay between the demand for a roadside screening device test (RSD test) and the collection of the sample.

The New Brunswick Provincial Court, in a decision reported at 355 N.B.R.(2d) 179; 917 A.P.R. 179, denied the motion. The accused moved for an order excluding the certificate of analysis on the ground that the breathalyzer demand was illegal because the reasonable and probable grounds to believe that there was an offence under s. 253 of the Criminal Code were almost entirely grounded on the result of the RSD test, which was illegal because the RSD test was not given "as soon as practicable" under s. 254(3) of the Code.

The New Brunswick Provincial Court dismissed the motion. The court found the accused guilty of driving while having an excessive blood-alcohol level and not guilty of impaired driving.

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) - A police officer stopped the accused after witnessing erratic driving - The officer smelled alcohol on the accused's breath - The officer made a demand for a roadside screening device test (RSD test) - The officer had a RSD in his police cruiser, but the mouth tube was missing - He contacted another officer, who travelled to the scene with an extra mouth tube - The wait was five to seven minutes - The time between the RSD test demand and the collection of samples was 13 minutes - The RSD test registered a fail - The officer made a breathalyzer demand - The accused was charged with impaired driving offences - The accused moved for an order excluding the certificate of analysis on the ground that the breathalyzer demand was illegal because the reasonable and probable grounds to believe that there was an offence under s. 253 of the Criminal Code were almost entirely grounded on the results of the RSD test, which was illegal because the RSD test was not administered "as soon as practicable" under s. 254(3) of the Code - The accused also asserted that in that time he would have had a realistic possibility of consulting counsel as he had a cellular telephone - The New Brunswick Provincial Court dismissed the motion - The officer's demand was within the acceptable time limits and the test was administered "as soon as practicable" - The officer's demand was given before the accused could reasonably consult counsel - It was 1:00 a.m. and law offices were closed - The accused did not know any lawyers he could have contacted on his cellular telephone - The wait was only five to seven minutes - The accused could not have consulted counsel in that short period - The demand was valid.

Criminal Law - Topic 1375

Offences against person and reputation - Motor vehicles - Impaired driving - Breathalyzer or blood sample - Demand for - [See Criminal Law - Topic 1374 ].

Criminal Law - Topic 1386.1

Offences against person and reputation - Motor vehicles - Impaired driving - Roadside screening test - Demand - [See Criminal Law - Topic 1374 ].

Criminal Law - Topic 1386.2

Offences against person and reputation - Motor vehicles - Impaired driving - Roadside screening test - Time and place for (incl. residual mouth alcohol) - [See Criminal Law - Topic 1374 ].

Droit criminel - Cote 1374

Infractions contre la personne et la réputation - Véhicules à moteur - Capacité de conduite affaiblie - Échantillon d'haleine ou de sang - Preuve et preuve par certificat (y compris preuve tendant à démontrer) - [Voir Criminal Law - Topic 1374 ].

Droit criminel - Cote 1375

Infractions contre la personne et la réputation - Véhicules à moteur - Capacité de conduite affaiblie - Éthylomètre - Ordre de fournir un échantillon d'haleine ou de sang - [Voir Criminal Law - Topic 1375 ].

Droit criminel - Cote 1386.1

Infractions contre la personne et la réputation - Véhicules à moteur - Capacité de conduite affaiblie - Ordre de se soumettre à une vérification routière - [Voir Criminal Law - Topic 1386.1 ].

Droit criminel - Cote 1386.2

Infractions contre la personne et la réputation - Véhicules à moteur - Capacité de conduite affaiblie - Test de détection routier - Moment et lieu (y compris le résidu d'alcool dans la bouche) - [Voir Criminal Law - Topic 1386.2 ].

Cases Noticed:

R. v. Searle (J.M.) (2006), 308 N.B.R.(2d) 216; 797 A.P.R. 216; 2006 NBCA 118, refd to. [para. 1].

R. v. Grant (D.) (2009), 391 N.R. 1; 253 O.A.C. 124 (S.C.C.), refd to. [para. 7].

R. v. Charette (K.) et al. (2009), 247 O.A.C. 369; 243 C.C.C.(3d) 480; 65 C.R.(6th) 224; 2009 ONCA 310, refd to. [para. 10].

R. v. Thomsen, [1988] 1 S.C.R. 640; 84 N.R. 347; 27 O.A.C. 85; 40 C.C.C.(3d) 411, refd to. [para. 14].

R. v. Grant (1991), 130 N.R. 250; 93 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 181; 292 A.P.R. 181 (S.C.C.), refd to. [para. 16].

R. v. Dewald (W.) - see R. v. Pierman (M.B.).

R. v. Pierman (M.B.) (1994), 73 O.A.C. 287; 19 O.R.(3d) 704 (C.A.), affd. [1996] 1 S.C.R. 68; 192 N.R. 237; 89 O.A.C. 146, refd to. [para. 18].

R. v. Bernshaw (N.), [1995] 1 S.C.R. 254; 176 N.R. 81; 53 B.C.A.C. 1; 87 W.A.C. 1, refd to. [para. 18].

R. v. Woods (J.C.), [2005] 2 S.C.R. 205; 336 N.R. 1; 195 Man.R.(2d) 131; 351 W.A.C. 131, refd to. [para. 19].

R. v. Danychuk (W.) (2004), 184 O.A.C. 131; 183 C.C.C.(3d) 337 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 21].

R. v. Latour (P.) (1997), 101 O.A.C. 108; 34 O.R.(3d) 150; 116 C.C.C.(3d) 279 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 22].

R. v. Coté (1992), 54 O.A.C. 281; 70 C.C.C.(3d) 280 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 22].

R. v. Torsney (B.) (2007), 221 O.A.C. 191; 217 C.C.C.(3d) 571; 150 C.R.R.(2d) 371; 2007 ONCA 67, refd to. [para. 23].

R. v. Singh (K.) (2005), 204 O.A.C. 231 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 25].

R. v. George (N.) (2004), 189 O.A.C. 161; 23 C.R.(6th) 181; 187 C.C.C.(3d) 289 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 27].

R. v. Stellato (T.), [1994] 2 S.C.R. 478; 168 N.R. 190; 72 O.A.C. 140; 31 C.R.(4th) 60; 90 C.C.C.(3d) 160 (C.A.), affing. (1993), 61 O.A.C. 217; 18 C.R.(4th) 127; 78 C.C.C.(3d) 380 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 38].

Statutes Noticed:

Criminal Code, R.S.C. 1985, c. C-46, sect. 254(3) [para. 1 et seq.].

Counsel:

Avocats:

Guylaine Basque, for the Crown;

Luc Roy, for the defendant.

This case was heard on December 29, 2009, and January 28, 2010, by LeBlanc, P.C.J., of the New Brunswick Provincial Court, who delivered the following decision on April 16, 2010.