R. v. MacDonald (R.A.), (1987) 79 N.S.R.(2d) 429 (ProvCt)

• Judge: Curran, P.C.J.
• Court: Provincial Court of Nova Scotia (Canada)
• Case Date: July 09, 1987
• Jurisdiction: Nova Scotia
• Citations: (1987), 79 N.S.R.(2d) 429 (ProvCt)

R. v. MacDonald (R.A.) (1987), 79 N.S.R.(2d) 429 (ProvCt);

    196 A.P.R. 429

MLB headnote and full text

R. v. Ronald Allan MacDonald

Indexed As: R. v. MacDonald (R.A.)

Nova Scotia Provincial Court

Curran, P.C.J.

July 9, 1987.

Summary:

The accused was charged with impaired driving and with driving with an excessive blood-alcohol content.

The Nova Scotia Provincial Court convicted the accused of driving with an excessive blood-alcohol content, but acquitted him of impaired driving.

Civil Rights - Topic 4612

Right to counsel - Waiver of - By intoxicated accused - Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, s. 10(b) - Upon being given a breathalyzer demand and informed of his right to counsel after an accident the intoxicated accused said that he worked for the Attorney General's department, knew all about the breathalyzer and did not need a lawyer - The Nova Scotia Provincial Court held that the accused waived his right to counsel, notwithstanding his condition - See paragraphs 16 to 17.

Civil Rights - Topic 8405

Charter of Rights and Freedoms - Criminal proceedings - Right to be informed without unreasonable delay of specific offence - Section 11(a) - After an accident the accused driver failed a breathalyzer test and was told he would be charged with impaired driving and leaving the scene of an accident - The next day he was served a summary offence ticket for the offence of leaving the scene - A week later he was served a copy of the breathalyzer technician's certificate and charges of impaired driving and driving with an excessive blood-alcohol content were laid - Two weeks later the accused was served a summons for the Criminal Code charges - The Nova Scotia Provincial Court held that the accused was informed of the charges against him within a reasonable time - See paragraphs 11 to 12, 18.

Criminal Law - Topic 1374

Motor vehicles - Impaired driving - Breathalyzer - Certificate evidence - Evidence to the contrary - The accused was given a breathalyzer test using a breathalyzer solution which had expired the day before - Expert testimony established that the solution was still suitable - The Nova Scotia Provincial Court accepted the results of the test - The court stated that evidence to the contrary must raise a reasonable doubt and must be more than mere speculation - See paragraphs 20 to 29.

Cases Noticed:

R. v. Parton (1983), 9 C.C.C.(3d) 295 (Alta. Q.B.), appld. [para. 14].

R. v. Clarkson (1986), 66 N.R. 114; 50 C.R.(3d) 289 (S.C.C.), consd. [para. 16].

R. v. Mohl (1987), 55 Sask.R. 22, not folld. [para. 17].

R. v. Lucas (1983), 57 N.S.R.(2d) 159; 120 A.P.R. 159, appld. [para. 18].

Criminal Code of Canada, ss. 222, 224, and 224A, Re (1971), 3 N.B.R.(2d) 511; 3 C.C.C.(2d) 243, appld. [para. 23].

R. v. Lightfoot, [1981] 1 S.C.R. 566; 36 N.R. 349; 24 C.R.(3d) 323, appld. [para. 24].

R. v. Andrews (1983), 59 N.S.R.(2d) 149; 125 A.P.R. 149, appld. [para. 27].

Statutes Noticed:

Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, 1982, sect. 10(b) [para. 16]; sect. 11(a) [para. 18].

Criminal Code, R.S.C. 1970, c. D-34, sect. 237(a), sect. 237(b), sect. 241(1)(c).

Counsel:

Duncan Beveridge, for the Crown;

Terry Cooper, for the accused.

This case was heard on May 22 and 26, and June 4 and 26, 1987, at Halifax, Nova Scotia, before Curran, P.C.J., of the Nova Scotia Provincial Court, who delivered the following judgment on July 9, 1987: