R. v. Frehlich (G.), (2007) 291 Sask.R. 268 (QB)

• Judge: Kovach, J.
• Court: Court of Queen's Bench of Saskatchewan (Canada)
• Case Date: January 18, 2007
• Jurisdiction: Saskatchewan
• Citations: (2007), 291 Sask.R. 268 (QB);2007 SKQB 26

R. v. Frehlich (G.) (2007), 291 Sask.R. 268 (QB)

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [2007] Sask.R. TBEd. JA.045

Greg Frehlich v. Her Majesty The Queen

(2005 Q.B.C.A. 34; 2007 SKQB 26)

Indexed As: R. v. Frehlich (G.)

Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench

Judicial Centre of Saskatoon

Kovach, J.

January 18, 2007.

Summary:

The accused appealed his impaired driving conviction on the ground that the trial judge, after reviewing the evidence, erred in simply compiling a list of the evidence supporting a finding of impairment without assessing the evidence that negated a finding of impairment or undermined the impairment evidence.

The Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench dismissed the appeal.

Criminal Law - Topic 1362

Motor vehicles - Impaired driving - Evidence and proof - The accused appealed his impaired driving conviction on the ground that the trial judge, after reviewing the evidence, erred in simply compiling a list of the evidence supporting a finding of impairment without appropriately considering or analyzing the evidence that negated a finding of impairment or undermined the impairment evidence - The Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench dismissed the appeal - A trial judge "must carefully review all of the reported tests and observations which inferentially support or negate any impairment of the accused's mental and physical capabilities, and then be satisfied beyond a reasonable doubt that the reasonable inferences to be drawn therefrom establish that the accused's ability [to drive] was impaired to the degree prescribed" - The trial judge, in summarizing the evidence supporting impairment, did not mean that he failed to appreciate or disregarded other evidence purportedly negating the finding of impairment - There was no evidence by the accused to explain hitting a road sign, leaving the scene of an accident, swerving all over the road, his slurred speech, bloodshot eyes, stumbling, nodding off to sleep and the strong smell of alcohol on his breath - On the whole of the evidence, a properly instructed trier of fact would have convicted the accused.

Cases Noticed:

R. v. Andres (1979), 1 Sask.R. 96 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 6].

R. v. Sheppard (C.), [2002] 1 S.C.R. 869; 284 N.R. 342; 211 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 50; 633 A.P.R. 50; 2002 SCC 26, refd to. [para. 7].

Lensen v. Lensen, [1987] 2 S.C.R. 672; 79 N.R. 334; 64 Sask.R. 6, refd to. [para. 8].

R. v. Harper (1982), 40 N.R. 255; 65 C.C.C.(2d) 193 (S.C.C.), refd to. [para. 9].

R. v. Landes (T.) (1997), 161 Sask.R. 305 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 10].

R. v. Yebes, [1987] 2 S.C.R. 168; 78 N.R. 351, refd to. [para. 10].

R. v. R.W., [1992] 2 S.C.R. 122; 137 N.R. 214; 54 O.A.C. 164, refd to. [para. 10].

R. v. Burke, [1996] 1 S.C.R. 474; 194 N.R. 247; 139 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 147; 433 A.P.R. 147, refd to. [para. 10].

R. v. D.W., [1991] 1 S.C.R. 742; 122 N.R. 277; 46 O.A.C. 352, refd to. [para. 11].

R. v. Hall (S.J.) (1994), 125 Sask.R. 62; 81 W.A.C. 62 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 13].

R. v. McCallum (H.) (1994), 125 Sask.R. 77; 81 W.A.C. 77 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 13].

R. v. Pelletier (J.G.) (1995), 128 Sask.R. 214; 85 W.A.C. 214 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 13].

R. v. Stellato (T.) (1993), 61 O.A.C. 217; 78 C.C.C.(3d) 380 (C.A.), affd. [1994] 2 S.C.R. 478; 168 N.R. 190; 72 O.A.C. 140, refd to. [para. 13].

R. v. Holman (C.) (1998), 173 Sask.R. 214 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 14].

R. v. McLean (N.T.) (2001), 204 Sask.R. 235; 2001 SKQB 101, refd to. [para. 16].

R. v. Campbell (W.S.) (1991), 87 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 269; 271 A.P.R. 269 (P.E.I.C.A.), refd to. [para. 16].

R. v. Flasch (G.C.), [2004] Sask.R. Uned. 231; 12 M.V.R.(5th) 106; 2004 SKQB 521, refd to. [para. 18].

R. v. Von Maldeghem (C.C.L.G.) (2005), 383 A.R. 117; 2005 ABQB 558, refd to. [para. 20].

Counsel:

Ronald J. Piche, for the accused;

Sheryl J. Fillo, for the Crown.

This appeal was heard before Kovach, J., of the Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench, Judicial Centre of Saskatoon, who delivered the following judgment on January 18, 2007.