R. v. Janiten, (1985) 70 A.R. 214 (ProvCt)

Judge:Abbott, P.C.J.
Court:Provincial Court (Alberta)
Case Date:November 21, 1985
Jurisdiction:Alberta
Citations:(1985), 70 A.R. 214 (ProvCt)
 
FREE EXCERPT

R. v. Janiten (1985), 70 A.R. 214 (ProvCt)

MLB headnote and full text

R. v. Janiten

(Docket No. C017-079823-2A01)

Indexed As: R. v. Janiten

Alberta Provincial Court

Abbott, P.C.J.

November 21, 1985.

Summary:

The accused was charged with failing to provide a breath sample for roadside analysis, contrary to s. 234.1(2) of the Criminal Code of Canada. The Alberta Provincial Court acquitted the accused.

Criminal Law - Topic 1366

Motor vehicles - Impaired driving - "Drives" - Meaning of - Police in a parked car observed an accused drive up, park and walk towards them, all without showing signs of impairment - Only as he approached did they smell alcohol on his breath - The Alberta Provincial Court acquitted the accused on a charge of failing to provide a breath sample for roadside analysis, because the accused was not driving a motor vehicle, having completed his journey.

Criminal Law - Topic 1367

Motor vehicles - Impaired driving - "Care or control" - Meaning of - Police in a parked car observed an accused drive up, park and walk towards them, all without showing signs of impairment - Only as he approached did they smell alcohol on his breath - The Alberta Provincial Court acquitted the accused on a charge of failing to provide a breath sample for roadside analysis, because the accused did not have care or control of a motor vehicle, where he had completed his journey.

Criminal Law - Topic 1386.3

Motor vehicles - Impaired driving - Roadside screening test - Refusal or failure to provide breath sample - Police in a parked car observed the accused drive up, park and walk towards them, all without showing signs of impairment - Only as he approached did they smell alcohol on his breath - The accused was given an A.L.E.R.T. demand, but failed to provide a breath sample - The Alberta Provincial Court acquitted the accused on a charge under s. 234.1(2) of the Criminal Code, because the accused was neither driving nor had care or control of a motor vehicle, where he had completed his journey.

Cases Noticed:

R. v. Letkeman (1983), 28 Sask.R. 307; 24 M.V.R. 273, consd. [para. 5].

Edkins v. Knowles, [1973] Q.B. 748, consd. [para. 11].

Statutes Noticed:

Criminal Code of Canada, R.S.C. 1970, c. C-34, sect. 234.1(1) [paras. 4, 18].

Authors and Works Noticed:

Black's Law Dictionary [para. 6].

McLeod, Takach and Segal, Breathalyzer Law in Canada [para. 10]; pp. 2-10 [para. 11].

Counsel:

T.R. Follett, for the Crown;

D.F. Reay, for the accused.

This case was heard before Abbott, P.C.J., of the Alberta Provincial Court, whose decision was delivered orally on November 21, 1985.

To continue reading

FREE SIGN UP