R. v. Geerligs (R.J.), (1994) 159 A.R. 254 (ProvCt)

• Judge: Fradsham, P.C.J.
• Court: Provincial Court of Alberta (Canada)
• Case Date: November 10, 1994
• Citations: (1994), 159 A.R. 254 (ProvCt);1994 CanLII 9167 (AB QB);159 AR 254;[1994] AJ No 871 (QL);25 WCB (2d) 340

R. v. Geerligs (R.J.) (1994), 159 A.R. 254 (ProvCt)

MLB headnote and full text

Her Majesty The Queen v. Robert John Geerligs

(Docket # 40731861P10101-02)

Indexed As: R. v. Geerligs (R.J.)

Alberta Provincial Court

Fradsham, P.C.J.

November 10, 1994.

Summary:

The accused was charged with operating a motor vehicle while his ability to do so was impaired and operating a motor vehicle while having an excessive blood-alcohol level, contrary to ss. 253(a) and 253(b) of the Criminal Code.

The Alberta Provincial Court found the accused not guilty of both charges.

Criminal Law - Topic 1362

Motor vehicles - Impaired driving - Evi­dence and proof - The accused was charged with impaired driving - There was conflicting evidence concerning the ac­cused's speech and walk and whether his face was flushed - The evidence was consistent concerning the smell of alcohol on the accused's breath - The Alberta Provincial Court acquitted the accused - The court considered the test for determin­ing impairment following the decision of the Supreme Court of Canada in R. v. Stellato (T.) and held that it could not safely draw an inference that the accused's ability to operate a motor vehicle was impaired by alcohol - See paragraphs 14 to 30.

Criminal Law - Topic 1363

Motor vehicles - Impaired driving - Meaning of impairment "by alcohol or a drug" - [See Criminal Law - Topic 1362 ].

Criminal Law - Topic 1376

Motor vehicles - Impaired driving - Breathalyzer - Proof of blood-alcohol content - The accused failed a breathalyzer and was charged with operat­ing a motor vehicle while having an ex­cessive blood-alcohol level - An expert gave evidence concerning the accused's alcohol elimination rate and testified that the accused's blood-alcohol reading would have been between 64 and 119 - The Alberta Provincial Court accepted the accused's evidence of the amount he had to drink and the expert's evidence - The court acquitted the accused, holding that evidence to the contrary had been pre­sented which raised a reasonable doubt about whether the accused's blood-alcohol content exceeded the legal limit and there­fore the presumption in s. 258(1)(c) of the Criminal Code was not available - See paragraphs 11 to 13.

Cases Noticed:

R. v. Heisler (W.) et al. (1994), 157 A.R. 178; 77 W.A.C. 178 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 2].

R. v. Stellato (T.), [1994] 2 S.C.R. 478; 168 N.R. 190; 72 O.A.C. 140; 31 C.R.(4th) 60, folld. [para. 2].

R. v. Taylor (1978), 12 A.R. 435 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 12].

R. v. McKenzie (1955), 20 C.R. 412 (Alta. Dist. Ct.), refd to. [para. 15].

R. v. Smith (K.M.) (1992), 131 A.R. 59; 25 W.A.C. 59 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 16].

R. v. Stellato (T.) (1993), 61 O.A.C. 217; 18 C.R.(4th) 126 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 17].

R. v. Conlon (1977), 12 A.R. 267 (Dist. Ct.), refd to. [para. 22].

Statutes Noticed:

Criminal Code, R.S.C. 1985, c. C-46, sect. 253(a), sect. 253(b) [para. 1]; sect. 258(1)(c) [para. 11].

Counsel:

L. Stein, for the Crown;

T. Sturgeon, for the accused.

This case was heard at Calgary, Alberta, before Fradsham, P.C.J., of the Alberta Provincial Court, who delivered the follow­ing judgment on November 10, 1994.