R. v. Hughes, (1982) 38 A.R. 276 (CA)

• Judge: Lieberman, Prowse, Moir, McClung and Belzil, JJ.A.
• Court: Court of Appeal (Alberta)
• Case Date: July 06, 1982
• Citations: (1982), 38 A.R. 276 (CA)

R. v. Hughes (1982), 38 A.R. 276 (CA)

MLB headnote and full text

R. v. Hughes

(Appeal No. 14649)

Indexed As: R. v. Hughes

Alberta Court of Appeal

Lieberman, Prowse, Moir, McClung and Belzil, JJ.A.

July 6, 1982

Summary:

The accused was charged and convicted by a judge and jury on a charge of driving a motor vehicle with an excessive blood alcohol content contrary to s. 236(1) of the Criminal Code. The accused appealed to the Alberta Court of Appeal.

The Alberta Court of Appeal allowed the appeal and ordered a new trial.

Criminal Law - Topic 1374

Motor vehicles - Impaired driving - Breathalyzer, certificate evidence of results of analysis of breath sample - Meaning of "evidence to the contrary" - Jury charge - The Alberta Court of Appeal directed a new trial where the trial judge failed to instruct the jury that if the evidence led by the accused raised a reasonable doubt that the blood-alcohol content of the accused was over .08 then the accused should be acquitted.

Criminal Law - Topic 1374

Motor vehicle - Impaired driving - Breathalyzer, certificate evidence of results of analysis of breath sample - The Alberta Court of Appeal reviewed the case law respecting the meaning of the words "evidence to the contrary" as found in s. 237(1)(c) of the Criminal Code of Canada (see paragraphs 11 to 21).

Words and Phrases

Evidence to the contrary - The Alberta Court of Appeal discussed the meaning of the phrase "evidence to the contrary" as found in s. 237(1)(c) of the Criminal Code of Canada, R.S.C. 1970, c. C-34.

Cases Noticed:

R. v. Davis (1973), 14 C.C.C.(2d) 513; [1974] 1 W.W.R. 87, ref'd to. [para. 11].

R. v. Moreau (1978), 23 N.R. 541; 42 C.C.C.(2d) 525, ref'd to. [para. 13].

R. v. Crosthwait (1980), 31 N.R. 603; 52 C.C.C.(2d) 129; [1980] 1 S.C.R. 1089, ref'd to. [paras. 15, 41].

R. v. Proudlock (1979), 24 N.R. 199; 43 C.C.C.(2d) 321, ref'd to. [para. 17].

Lightfoot v. The Queen (1981), 36 N.R. 349; 123 D.L.R.(3d) 104, ref'd to. [para. 18].

R. v. Reeves (1978), 9 A.R. 149; 40 C.C.C.(2d) 52, ref'd to. [para. 19].

R. v. Taylor (1979), 12 A.R. 435; 8 Alta. L.R. 31; 44 C.C.C.(2d) 22, ref'd to. [para. 19]; dist. [para. 51].

R. v. Kucher (1979), 16 A.R. 494; 48 C.C.C.(2d) 115, ref'd to. [para. 19].

R. v. Seniuk (1980), 23 A.R. 314, ref'd to. [para. 19].

Moreau (1978), 23 N.R. 541; 42 C.C.C.(2d) 525, ref'd to. [para. 36].

R. v. Kuzmack (1954), 110 C.C.C. 338 (Alta. C.A.) ref'd to. [para. 40].

Statutes Noticed:

Criminal Code of Canada, R.S.C. 1970, c. C-34, sect. 237(1)(c) [para. 10].

Counsel:

G.A. Hardy, for the appellant;

Jack Watson, for the Crown.

This appeal was heard by LIEBERMAN, PROWSE, MOIR, McCLUNG and BELZIL, JJ.A., of the Alberta Court of Appeal.

The judgment of the Court of Appeal was delivered at Edmonton, Alberta, on July 6, 1982 and the following opinions were filed:

PROWSE, J.A. - see paragraphs 1 to 23;

BELZIL, J.A., dissenting - see paragraphs 24 to 52.

LIEBERMAN, MOIR and McCLUNG, JJ.A., concurred with PROWSE, J.A.