R. v. Simmons (R.C.), (2006) 249 N.S.R.(2d) 31 (PC)

• Judge: Crawford, P.C.J.
• Court: Provincial Court of Nova Scotia (Canada)
• Case Date: Thursday December 22, 2005
• Jurisdiction: Nova Scotia
• Citations: (2006), 249 N.S.R.(2d) 31 (PC);2006 NSPC 29

R. v. Simmons (R.C.) (2006), 249 N.S.R.(2d) 31 (PC);

    792 A.P.R. 31

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [2006] N.S.R.(2d) TBEd. SE.021

R. v. Ross Clayton Simmons

(1358642; 2006 NSPC 29)

Indexed As: R. v. Simmons (R.C.)

Nova Scotia Provincial Court

Crawford, P.C.J.

June 28, 2006.

Summary:

An accused was charged with refusing to provide a breath sample to an approved screening device.

The Nova Scotia Provincial Court found the accused guilty.

Criminal Law - Topic 1386.1

Motor vehicles - Impaired driving - Roadside screening test - Demand - At 6:43 p.m, after a "high risk takedown" on a public highway, a police officer informed the accused that he was being arrested for possession of a weapon and making threats with a weapon - He was read his Charter rights and police caution - The officer noted a smell of liquor on the accused's breath - There were reports that the accused had been intoxicated - An approved screening device was unavailable - It was decided to make the demand at the police station where the other offences were to be dealt with - Upon arrival at 7:17 p.m., an approved screening device demand was made - The accused refused to comply and was charged with refusal - The accused asserted that the demand did not fall within the immediacy requirements of s. 254(2) of the Criminal Code - The Nova Scotia Provincial Court found the accused guilty - The case fell into the category of "unusual circumstances" where the forthwith requirement under s. 254(2) of the Criminal Code could be given a more flexible interpretation.

Criminal Law - Topic 1386.2

Motor vehicles - Impaired driving - Roadside screening test - Time and place for - [See Criminal Law - Topic 1386.1].

Cases Noticed:

R. v. Grant, [1991] 3 S.C.R. 139; 130 N.R. 250; 93 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 181; 292 A.P.R. 181; 67 C.C.C.(3d) 268, refd to. [para. 19].

R. v. Cote (1992), 54 O.A.C. 281; 70 C.C.C.(3d) 280 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 21].

R. v. Debaie (W.A.) (2000), 187 N.S.R.(2d) 188; 585 A.P.R. 188 (Prov. Ct.), refd to. [para. 22].

R. v. Woods (J.C.), [2005] 2 S.C.R. 205; 336 N.R. 1; 195 Man.R.(2d) 131; 351 W.A.C. 131; 2005 SCC 42, refd to. [para. 23].

Counsel:

Paul Scovil, for the Crown;

David Hirtle, for the defence.

Crawford, P.C.J., heard this matter at Bridgewater, Nova Scotia, on December 22, 2005 and delivered the following judgment on June 28, 2006.