R. v. Schell (J.J.), 2012 SKQB 438

• Judge: Acton, J.
• Court: Court of Queen's Bench of Saskatchewan (Canada)
• Case Date: October 25, 2012
• Jurisdiction: Saskatchewan
• Citations: 2012 SKQB 438;(2012), 410 Sask.R. 103 (QB)

R. v. Schell (J.J.) (2012), 410 Sask.R. 103 (QB)

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [2012] Sask.R. TBEd. NO.024

Her Majesty the Queen v. Jesse J. Schell

(2012 Q.B.C.A. No. 9; 2012 SKQB 438)

Indexed As: R. v. Schell (J.J.)

Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench

Judicial Centre of Saskatoon

Acton, J.

October 25, 2012.

Summary:

The accused was charged with driving while having an excessive blood-alcohol level. He sought exclusion of the certificate of breath analyses under s. 24(2) of the Charter, asserting that his right to counsel under s. 10(b) had been breached.

The Saskatchewan Provincial Court, in a decision reported at 388 Sask.R. 1, dismissed the application. The trial proceeded.

The Saskatchewan Provincial Court, in a decision reported at 388 Sask.R. 15, found the accused not guilty. The Crown appealed.

The Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench allowed the appeal.

Criminal Law - Topic 1374

Offences against person and reputation - Motor vehicles - Impaired driving - Breathalyzer or blood sample - Evidence and certificate evidence (incl. evidence tending to show) - The accused was charged with driving while having an excessive blood-alcohol level - The certificate of analyses stated that the first sample "was taken at 2331 hours" and that the second sample "was taken at 2354 hours" - The trial judge found the accused not guilty - The Crown's witnesses had not offered any explanation as to how the handwritten four digit numbers, without colons, periods or decimals, could be relied on to prove "standard time" as contemplated in the Interpretation Act - Therefore, the Crown had not proven beyond a reasonable doubt that there was an interval of at least 15 minutes between the samples - The Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench allowed the Crown's appeal - The trial judge's conclusion was more properly characterized as conjecture than inference - It would be impossible to conclude that "2331" referred to anything other than 2300 hours and 31 minutes, and that "2354" referred to anything other than 2300 hours and 54 minutes on the 24-hour clock.

Time - Topic 400

Divisions or standards - General - [See Criminal Law - Topic 1374 ].

Cases Noticed:

R. v. Michel (J.) (2011), 383 Sask.R. 140; 2011 SKQB 356, dist. [paras. 4, 7].

R. v. Carrie (1997), 10 C.R.(5th) 356 (Ont. C.J.), refd to. [para. 10].

R. v. Cardinal (S.R.), [2002] 1 W.W.R. 437; 301 A.R. 1; 2001 ABQB 872, folld. [para. 12].

Counsel:

Cory M. Bliss, for the Crown;

Michael W. Owens, for the defence.

This appeal was heard before Acton, J., of the Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench, Judicial Centre of Saskatoon, who delivered the following judgment, dated October 25, 2012.