R. v. Perrier, (1984) 5 O.A.C. 304 (CA)

• Judge: Howland, C.J.O., Martin and Blair, JJ.A.
• Court: Court of Appeal (Ontario)
• Case Date: September 19, 1984
• Jurisdiction: Ontario
• Citations: (1984), 5 O.A.C. 304 (CA)

R. v. Perrier (1984), 5 O.A.C. 304 (CA)

MLB headnote and full text

R. v. Perrier

Indexed As: R. v. Perrier

Ontario Court of Appeal

Howland, C.J.O., Martin and Blair, JJ.A.

October 15, 1984.

Summary:

The accused was convicted of driving a motor vehicle while having an excessive blood-alcohol content, contrary to s. 236(1) of the Criminal Code of Canada. The accused's appeal was dismissed. The accused appealed to the Court of Appeal.

The Ontario Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal.

Criminal Law - Topic 1381

Motor vehicles - Impaired driving - Breathalyzer - Breath sample - What constitutes - An accused provided a breath sample - When blown into the breathalyzer, part of the sample escaped into the air when the plastic hosing became detached from the bubbler - The Ontario Court of Appeal held that the sample was not a sample for purposes of s. 237(1)(c)(ii), (iii) and (iv) of the Criminal Code of Canada, where in the opinion of a qualified technician it could not be the subject of a proper analysis within s. 235(1) - See paragraphs 10 to 11.

Words and Phrases

Each Sample - The Ontario Court of Appeal discussed the meaning of the words "each sample" as found in s. 237(1) (c)(ii), (iii) and (iv) of the Criminal Code of Canada - See paragraph 10.

Cases Noticed:

R. v. Finch (1978), 42 C.C.C.(2d) 182, disagreed with [para. 8].

R. v. Halbauer (1974), 2 A.R. 416 (Alta. S.C.T.D.), ref'd to. [para. 10].

R. v. Zwack (1979), 26 A.R. 399 (Alta. S.C.T.D.), ref'd to. [para. 10].

Statutes Noticed:

Criminal Code of Canada, R.S.C. 1970, c. C-34, sect. 235(1) [paras. 5, 7-8, 10-11]; sect. 237(1)(c)(ii), sect. 237(1)(c)(iii), sect. 237(1)(c)(iv) [paras. 5, 10-11].

Authors and Works Noticed:

Craies on Statute Law (7th Ed. 1971), pp. 159-160 [para. 9].

Driedger, The Construction of Statutes (2nd Ed. 1983), pp. 89-91 [para. 9].

Maxwell on the Interpretation of Statutes (12th Ed. 1969), pp. 58-64 [para. 9].

Counsel:

R.B. Lester, for the appellant;

Kenneth C. Campbell, for the respondent.

This appeal was heard before Howland, C.J.O., Martin and Blair, JJ.A., of the Ontario Court of Appeal on September 19, 1984. The decision of the Court of Appeal was delivered by Howland, C.J.O., and released on October 15, 1984.