R. v. Sundquist (M.R.), (1999) 182 Sask.R. 181 (QB)

• Judge: Klebuc, J.
• Court: Court of Queen's Bench of Saskatchewan (Canada)
• Case Date: July 22, 1999
• Jurisdiction: Saskatchewan
• Citations: (1999), 182 Sask.R. 181 (QB)

R. v. Sundquist (M.R.) (1999), 182 Sask.R. 181 (QB)

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [1999] Sask.R. TBEd. AU.053

Her Majesty The Queen (appellant) v. Monty Rae Sundquist (respondent)

(1998 Q.B.C.A. No. 92)

Indexed As: R. v. Sundquist (M.R.)

Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench

Judicial Centre of Humboldt

Klebuc, J.

July 22, 1999.

Summary:

The accused was acquitted of impaired driving and driving while having an exces­sive blood-alcohol level. The Crown appealed the acquittals.

The Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench allowed the appeal, quashed the acquittals, and remitted the matter to the Provincial Court for a new trial.

Civil Rights - Topic 3603

Detention and imprisonment - Detention - What constitutes arbitrary detention - [See first Civil Rights - Topic 8348 ].

Civil Rights - Topic 4608

Right to counsel - Right to be advised of - [See first Civil Rights - Topic 8348 ].

Civil Rights - Topic 8348

Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms - Application - Exceptions - Reasonable limits prescribed by law (Charter, s. 1) - The trial judge held that administering sobriety tests without advising the accused of his right to counsel violated his s. 10(b) Charter rights and was not justified under s. 1 of the Charter - The judge excluded the certificate of analysis and sobriety test results and acquitted the accused of impaired driving and driving while having an excessive blood-alcohol level - The Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench allowed a Crown appeal - The detention of the accused was not arbitrary within the meaning of s. 9 of the Charter or, if arbi­trary, it was justified by s. 1 - While the detention associated with the sobriety tests conducted under ss. 40(8) and 40(9) of the Highway Traffic Act triggered the right to counsel under s. 10(b) of the Charter, the failure to advise the accused of such rights was justified by s. 1 and the evidence obtained was admissible.

Civil Rights - Topic 8348

Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms - Application - Exceptions - Reasonable limits prescribed by law (Charter, s. 1) - The Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench stated that "[t]he direct relationship between drinking drivers and motor vehicle accidents and public safety satisfies me that the imposition of a limit on the right to counsel implicitly required by roadside physical coordination tests conducted under s. 40(8) of The Highway Traffic Act is reasonable and can be justified in a free and democratic society" - See paragraph 41.

Police - Topic 3105

Powers - Investigation - Impaired driving (incl. sobriety tests etc.) - [See both Civil Rights - Topic 8348 ].

Cases Noticed:

R. v. Thomsen, [1988] 1 S.C.R. 640; 84 N.R. 347; 27 O.A.C. 85; 40 C.C.C.(3d) 411; 63 C.R.(3d) 1; 4 M.V.R.(2d) 185; 32 C.R.R. 257, refd to. [para. 12].

R. v. Ladouceur, [1990] 1 S.C.R. 1257; 108 N.R. 171; 40 O.A.C. 1; 77 C.R.(3d) 110; 56 C.C.C.(3d) 22; 21 M.V.R.(2d) 165, refd to. [para. 14].

R. v. Hufsky, [1988] 1 S.C.R. 621; 84 N.R. 365; 27 O.A.C. 103; 40 C.C.C.(3d) 398; 63 C.R.(3d) 14; 4 M.V.R.(2d) 170; 32 C.R.R. 193, refd to. [para. 14].

R. v. Therens, [1985] 1 S.C.R. 613; 59 N.R. 122; 40 Sask.R. 122; 18 C.C.C.(3d) 481; 18 D.L.R.(4th) 655; [1985] 4 W.W.R. 286; 32 M.V.R. 153; 45 C.R.(3d) 97, refd to. [para. 14].

R. v. Iron, [1987] 3 W.W.R. 97; 53 Sask.R. 241 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 14].

R. v. Dedman, [1985] 2 S.C.R. 2; 60 N.R. 34; 11 O.A.C. 241; 46 C.R.(3d) 193; 20 C.C.C.(3d) 97; 34 M.V.R. 1, refd to. [para. 15].

R. v. Waterfield, [1964] 1 Q.B. 164; [1963] 3 All E.R. 659 (C.C.A.), refd to. [para. 15].

R. v. Simpson (R.) (1993), 60 O.A.C. 327; 79 C.C.C.(3d) 482 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 19].

R. v. Milne (R.S.) (1996), 90 O.A.C. 348; 107 C.C.C.(3d) 118 (C.A.), leave to appeal refused [1996] 3 S.C.R. xiii; 207 N.R. 78; 97 O.A.C. 159, refd to. [para. 19].

R. v. Lott (E.C.) (1998), 174 Sask.R. 133 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 19].

R. v. Duncanson (1991), 93 Sask.R. 193; 4 W.A.C. 193; 12 C.R.(4th) 86 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 20].

R. v. Oakes, [1986] 1 S.C.R. 103; 65 N.R. 87; 14 O.A.C. 335; 26 D.L.R.(4th) 200; 50 C.R.(3d) 1; 24 C.C.C.(3d) 321; 19 C.R.R. 308, refd to. [para. 23].

R. v. Saunders (1988), 27 O.A.C. 184; 41 C.C.C.(3d) 532 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 25].

R. v. Bonin (1989), 47 C.C.C.(3d) 230 (B.C.C.A.), leave to appeal refused [1989] 2 S.C.R. v; 102 N.R. 400, refd to. [para. 25].

R. v. Smith (J.M.) (1996), 88 O.A.C. 374; 105 C.C.C.(3d) 58 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 25].

R. v. Sullivan (1989), 22 M.V.R.(2d) 261 (Ct. Martial Appeal Ct.), refd to. [para. 25].

R. v. Gallant (1989), 95 A.R. 101; 48 C.C.C.(3d) 329 (C.A.), leave to appeal refused [1990] 1 S.C.R. vii; 105 N.R. 398; 104 A.R. 240, refd to. [para. 26].

R. v. Stouten (1989), 100 A.R. 137 (C.A.), leave to appeal refused [1990] 1 S.C.R. xi; 105 N.R. 398; 104 A.R. 240, refd to. [para. 26].

R. v. Baroni (1989), 91 N.S.R.(2d) 295; 233 A.P.R. 295; 49 C.C.C.(3d) 553 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 26].

R. v. Hill (B.C.) (1990), 86 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 197; 268 A.P.R. 197; 25 M.V.R.(2d) 27 (P.E.I.C.A.), refd to. [para. 26].

R. v. Oldham (S.F.) (1996), 181 N.B.R.(2d) 321; 460 A.P.R. 321; 109 C.C.C.(3d) 392 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 26].

R. v. MacDonald (1990), 85 Sask.R. 213 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 27].

R. v. Perkins (J.E.) (1993), 112 Sask.R. 20 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 27].

R. v. Ruszkowski (1995), 18 M.V.R.(3d) 209 (Sask. Prov. Ct.), refd to. [para. 27].

R. v. Haugen (1989), 79 Sask.R. 83 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 27].

R. v. Pelletier (J.G.) (1994), 117 Sask.R. 303 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 27].

R. v. Bonogofski (1986), 47 M.V.R. 48 (B.C. Co. Ct.), revd. (1987), 39 C.C.C.(3d) 457 (B.C.C.A.), refd to. [para. 28].

R. v. Wilson, [1990] 1 S.C.R. 1291; 108 N.R. 207; 107 A.R. 321; 56 C.C.C.(3d) 142, refd to. [para. 34].

R. v. Talbourdet (1984), 32 Sask.R. 5; 12 C.C.C.(3d) 173 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 39].

R. v. Tremblay (G.) (1998), 163 Sask.R. 238; 165 W.A.C. 238 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 39].

R. v. Mellenthin, [1992] 3 S.C.R. 615; 144 N.R. 50; 135 A.R. 1; 33 W.A.C. 1, refd to. [para. 45].

Statutes Noticed:

Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, 1982, sect. 1 [para. 2]; sect. 9 [para. 7]; sect. 10(b) [para. 2].

Highway Traffic Act, S.S. 1986, c. H-3.1, sect. 40(8), sect. 40(9) [para. 8].

Counsel:

J.T. Irvine and A.B. Gerein, for the appel­lant;

B.H. Lannan, for the respondent.

This appeal was heard before Klebuc, J., of the Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench, Judicial Centre of Humboldt, who delivered the following judgment on July 22, 1999.