R. v. Gilbret (G.), 2015 SKPC 37

• Judge: Cardinal, J.
• Court: Provincial Court of Saskatchewan (Canada)
• Case Date: March 04, 2015
• Jurisdiction: Saskatchewan
• Citations: 2015 SKPC 37;(2015), 470 Sask.R. 102 (PC)

R. v. Gilbret (G.) (2015), 470 Sask.R. 102 (PC)

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [2015] Sask.R. TBEd. MR.055

Her Majesty the Queen v. Garry Gilbret

(Information No. 2407788; 2015 SKPC 37)

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

Saskatchewan Provincial Court

Cardinal, J.

March 4, 2015.

Summary:

The accused was charged with operating a motor vehicle while his ability to do so was impaired by a drug.

The Saskatchewan Provincial Court found the accused guilty of the charge.

Criminal Law - Topic 1362

Motor vehicles - Impaired driving - Evidence and proof - The Saskatchewan Provincial Court found the accused guilty of operating a motor vehicle while his ability to do so was impaired by a drug - Cst. Hellegards had reasonable and probable grounds to demand that the accused submit to an evaluation conducted by an evaluating officer pursuant to s. 254(3.1) of the Criminal Code - He observed the vehicle some distance away, on a road with a posted speed limit of 80km/hr, yet the vehicle was travelling slowly and then, for no apparent reason, turned off onto a dirt trail before reaching the police vehicle - The accused's slow movements both in and out of the vehicle, his attempt to eat the powder off a spoon he picked up off the dash of the vehicle, his heavy eyelids and the sleepy look about him, in the absence of a smell of alcohol, all lead the officer to believe that the accused was impaired by a drug - There was no requirement that the Crown link the toxicology report to the time of driving by expert evidence - The information charging the accused did not particularize the type of drug the Crown alleged was involved, nor was the Crown required to prove more than the ability of the accused to operate a motor vehicle was impaired by a drug - Cst. Schmidt's evidence was that the accused was impaired by a drug, specifically a narcotic analgesic, due to his performance during the Drug Recognition Evaluation tests - Although the drug recognition tests were not related back to the time of driving, they occurred within a short time after the accused had been arrested - The toxicology report and the evidence of Campbell, a forensic specialist, indicated that hydromorphone was detected in the accused's body - The presence of drugs, combined with Campbell's evidence as to the effect of hydromorphone on the human body, supported the observations and opinions of Cst. Hellegards and Cst. Schmidt that the accused's ability to operate a motor vehicle was impaired by a drug.

Criminal Law - Topic 1363

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

Criminal Law - Topic 1386.7

Motor vehicles - Impaired driving - Drug evaluation (incl. demand and time for) - [See Criminal Law - Topic 1362 ].

Cases Noticed:

R. v. D.W., [1991] 1 S.C.R. 742; 122 N.R. 277; 46 O.A.C. 352; 63 C.C.C.(3d) 397, refd to. [para. 54].

R. v. Stellato (T.), [1994] 2 S.C.R. 478; 168 N.R. 190; 72 O.A.C. 140, refd to. [para. 55].

R. v. Landes (T.) (1997), 161 Sask.R. 305 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 56].

R. v. Polturak (1988), 90 A.R. 158; 1988 ABCA 306, refd to. [para. 59].

R. v. Perillat (S.W.) (2012), 403 Sask.R. 187; 2012 SKPC 135, refd to. [para. 60].

Counsel:

Tyla Olenchuk, for the Crown;

Roseanne Newman, Q.C., for the accused.

This matter was heard at Nipawin, Saskatchewan, before Cardinal, P.C.J., of the Saskatchewan Provincial Court, who delivered the following decision on March 4, 2015.