R. v. Singh (S.), [2015] A.R. TBEd. JL.056
| Judge | Henderson, P.C.J. |
| Court | Provincial Court of Alberta (Canada) |
| Case Date | February 23, 2015 |
| Citations | [2015] A.R. TBEd. JL.056;2015 ABPC 62 |
R. v. Singh (S.), [2015] A.R. TBEd. JL.056
MLB being edited
Currently being edited for A.R. - judgment temporarily in rough form.
Temp. Cite: [2015] A.R. TBEd. JL.056
Her Majesty the Queen v. Satinder Singh (accused)
(140696089P1; 2015 ABPC 62)
Indexed As: R. v. Singh (S.)
Alberta Provincial Court
Henderson, P.C.J.
June 24, 2015.
Summary:
The accused was charged with impaired driving (Criminal Code, s. 253(1)(a)) and with operating a motor vehicle with a blood alcohol concentration higher than that permitted by s. 253(1)(b). The accused filed Notice of Motion asserting that his rights under ss. 8, 10(a) and 10(b) of the Charter had been violated. He sought a remedy under s. 24(2) of the Charter excluding evidence of the breath test results.
The Alberta Provincial Court held that the accused's s. 10 counsel rights were not violated; however, his rights under s. 8 were violated at the time of his arrest and at the time of the demand for a sample of his breath. The police officer observed moderate evidence of alcohol consumption, but only minimal evidence of the impairment of driving skills. Thus, while the officer had a genuine subjective belief that the ability of the accused to operate a motor vehicle was impaired by alcohol, the court concluded that when the totality of the circumstances was considered, his belief was not objectively reasonable. Therefore, the demand for the breath sample was not lawful and, as a result, the rights of the accused under s. 8 of the Charter were violated. Notwithstanding the breach, the court concluded that the certificate of analyses should not be excluded from evidence. The court reviewed the principles applicable with respect to reasonable grounds to demand a breath sample and s. 8 of the Charter.
Civil Rights - Topic 1217
Security of the person - Lawful or reasonable search - What constitutes unreasonable search and seizure - See paragraphs 74 to 99.
Civil Rights - Topic 1404.1
Security of the person - Law enforcement - Breath or blood samples - See paragraphs 74 to 99.
Civil Rights - Topic 4604
Right to counsel - General - Denial of or interference with - What constitutes - See paragraphs 100 to 123.
Civil Rights - Topic 4608
Right to counsel - General - Right to be advised of - See paragraphs 100 to 123.
Civil Rights - Topic 4609
Right to counsel - General - Duty to notify accused of or explain right to counsel - See paragraphs 100 to 123.
Civil Rights - Topic 4610
Right to counsel - General - Impaired driving (incl. demand for breath or blood sample) - See paragraphs 66 to 73 and 100 to 123.
Civil Rights - Topic 4613
Right to counsel - General - Requirement of arrest or detention and notice of reasons for - See paragraphs 66 to 73.
Civil Rights - Topic 8368
Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms - Denial of rights - Remedies - Exclusion of evidence - See paragraphs 124 to 139.
Criminal Law - Topic 1372
Motor vehicles - Impaired driving - Breathalyzer or blood sample - Demand - Reasonable grounds - See paragraphs 74 to 85.
Criminal Law - Topic 1374
Motor vehicles - Impaired driving - Breathalyzer or blood sample - Evidence and certificate evidence (incl. evidence tending to show) - See paragraphs 86 to 99.
Police - Topic 3105
Powers - Investigation - Impaired driving - See paraphs 74 to 99.
Counsel:
M. Inuzuka, for the Crown;
K. Aujla, for the accused.
This voir dire was held in Edmonton, Alberta, on February 23, 2015, before Henderson, P.C.J., of the Alberta Provincial Court, who delivered the following decision on June 24, 2015.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
R v Barton,
...must be some overt action on the part of the police officer which alerts the suspect to the reason for the detention”: R v Singh, 2015 ABPC 62 at para [156] Ultimately, in Tetrault, the Court found that the accused knew why he was being arrested and there was ......
-
R v Dahl, 2017 ABPC 48
...grounds. The result was that the breath samples were excluded from evidence, and the accused was acquitted. In the case of R v Singh, 2015 ABPC 62 the police spoke directly to the complainant who told him that she had been following a suspected impaired driver. She provided a description of......
-
R v Van Driel, 2017 ABPC 23
...suspicion that the man had alcohol in his body which might have properly given rise to an A.L.E.R.T. demand. In the case of R v Singh, 2015 ABPC 62 the police spoke directly to the complainant who told him that she had been following a suspected impaired driver. She provided a description o......
-
R. v. Tetreault (B.M.), 2016 ABQB 373
...must be some overt action on the part of the police officer which alerts the suspect to the reason for the detention:" R v Singh , 2015 ABPC 62 at para 70. [144] The testimony of Cst. Rauf was that when he was speaking to Mr. Tetreault through the partially open door, he said that he s......
-
R. v. Tetreault (B.M.), 2016 ABQB 373
..."There must be some overt action on the part of the police officer which alerts the suspect to the reason for the detention:" R v Singh , 2015 ABPC 62 at para 70. [144] The testimony of Cst. Rauf was that when he was speaking to Mr. Tetreault through the partially open door, he said that he......
-
R v Borg, 2018 ABPC 298
...done and the Court chose not to exclude subsequent evidence. [51] Judge Henderson in R v Singh, 2015 ABPC 62 noted at para. 70 that the Woychuk decision clarifies There must be some overt action on the part of the police officer which alerts the sus......
-
R v Barton,
...must be some overt action on the part of the police officer which alerts the suspect to the reason for the detention”: R v Singh, 2015 ABPC 62 at para [156] Ultimately, in Tetrault, the Court found that the accused knew why he was being arrested and there was ......
-
R v Van Driel, 2017 ABPC 23
...suspicion that the man had alcohol in his body which might have properly given rise to an A.L.E.R.T. demand. In the case of R v Singh, 2015 ABPC 62 the police spoke directly to the complainant who told him that she had been following a suspected impaired driver. She provided a description o......