R. v. Fredrek, (1979) 17 A.R. 613 (CA)

• Judge: Clement, Prowse and Shannon, JJ.A.
• Court: Court of Appeal (Alberta)
• Case Date: October 31, 1979
• Citations: (1979), 17 A.R. 613 (CA)

R. v. Fredrek (1979), 17 A.R. 613 (CA)

MLB headnote and full text

R. v. Fredrek

Indexed As: R. v. Fredrek

Alberta Court of Appeal

Clement, Prowse and Shannon, JJ.A.

October 31, 1979.

Summary:

This headnote contains no summary.

Criminal Law - Topic 90

Estoppel - Issues decided in prior proceedings - The accused was charged in the same information with impaired driving (s. 234) and with failing to comply with a demand for a breath sample (s. 235) - The accused was tried simultaneously on both charges and was acquitted of the charge under s. 235 on "purely technical grounds" but was convicted of the charge of impaired driving - On appeal the accused argued that the Crown was estopped from using the same evidence, to support a conviction for impaired driving, that supported an acquittal on the charge under s. 235 - The Alberta Court of Appeal held that estoppel was not available to the accused in these circumstances because the acquittal was based on "purely technical grounds".

Cases Noticed:

R. v. Zink (1978), 7 A.R. 553; 38 C.C.C.(2d) 97, refd to. [para. 4].

D.P.P. v. Humphreys (1976), 63 Cr. App. R. 95, refd to. [para. 4].

R. v. Casson, [1976] 4 W.W.R. 561, refd to. [para. 5].

R. v. Welyki (1975), 26 C.C.C.(2d) 484, refd to. [para. 7].

Authors and Works Noticed:

Friedland, Double Jeopardy, p. 137 [para. 6].

Counsel:

T.C. Semenuk, for the appellant;

I.F. Kirkpatrick, for the respondent.

This appeal was heard by CLEMENT, PROWSE and SHANNON, JJ.A., of the Alberta Court of Appeal. The judgment of the Alberta Court of Appeal was delivered by PROWSE, J.A., at Calgary, Alberta, on October 31, 1979.