R. v. Kazmiruk (G.), 2015 SKPC 21

• Judge: Gray, P.C.J.
• Court: Provincial Court of Saskatchewan (Canada)
• Case Date: February 11, 2015
• Jurisdiction: Saskatchewan
• Citations: 2015 SKPC 21;(2015), 470 Sask.R. 123 (PC)

R. v. Kazmiruk (G.) (2015), 470 Sask.R. 123 (PC)

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [2015] Sask.R. TBEd. MR.064

Her Majesty the Queen v. Garrett Kazmiruk

(Information No. 24541422; 2015 SKPC 21)

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

Saskatchewan Provincial Court

Gray, P.C.J.

February 11, 2015.

Summary:

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

The Saskatchewan Provincial Court found the accused not guilty.

Criminal Law - Topic 1362

Motor vehicles - Impaired driving - Evidence and proof - A truck driven by the accused (Kazmiruk) collided with a parked van - The accused was charged with impaired driving - The Saskatchewan Provincial Court found the accused not guilty - The court concluded that there was but slight evidence of impairment rather than evidence of slight impairment as referenced in R. v. Stellato - The court stated, inter alia, that "The most potentially damning evidence comes from the statement 'I am guilty' made by the accused to the officer in response to his rights to counsel. It is my view that such a statement is a legal conclusion on the very point the Court is obliged to determine. Although admissions of fact can be probative, statements related to conclusions in law are not and certainly do not obviate the need for objective evidence of conduct that departs from the norm. In this instance, there is evidence of an accident the nature of which is a very significant departure from the norm; there is also a credible explanation. The evidence of physical impairment is very slight; I note particularly the evidence of the civilian witnesses and the fact that but for a sway in the step of the accused, Constable Marshall was intending simply to complete an accident report. ... On the whole of the evidence before me I find that the evidence of impairment is equivocal ... Although it is quite possible that the alcohol consumed by Mr. Kazmiruk contributed to him falling asleep and losing control of his vehicle, the evidence does not satisfy the Court to the standard of beyond a reasonable doubt that this was the case. After a careful consideration of all of the evidence, I find myself with a reasonable doubt, the benefit of which must go to the accused" - See paragraphs 36 to 39.

Criminal Law - Topic 5255

Evidence and witnesses - Admissions - General principles - [See Criminal Law - Topic 1362 ].

Cases Noticed:

R. v. Stellato (T.) (1993), 61 O.A.C. 217 (C.A.), affd. (1994), 168 N.R. 190; 72 O.A.C. 140 (S.C.C.), refd to. [para. 31].

R. v. Pelletier (1989), 79 Sask.R. 22; 51 C.C.C.(3d) 161 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 37].

Counsel:

Will Collins, for the Crown;

Kaitlyn Perrin, for the accused.

This matter was heard at Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, before Gray, P.C.J., of the Saskatchewan Provincial Court, who delivered the following judgment on February 11, 2015.