R. v. Sweetapple, (1985) 53 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 141 (NFDC)

• Case Date: May 27, 1985
• Jurisdiction: Newfoundland and Labrador
• Citations: (1985), 53 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 141 (NFDC)

R. v. Sweetapple (1985), 53 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 141 (NFDC);

    156 A.P.R. 141

MLB headnote and full text

R. v. Sweetapple

(1984 No. 829)

Indexed As: R. v. Sweetapple

Newfoundland District Court

Judicial Centre of St. John's

Barry, D.C.J.

May 27, 1985.

Summary:

The accused appealed from his conviction for driving with an excessive blood-alcohol content contrary to s. 236 of the Criminal Code.

The Newfoundland District Court dismissed the appeal.

Criminal Law - Topic 1374

Motor vehicles - Impaired driving - Breathalyzer - Certificate evidence - Time of test - A breathalyzer certificate expressed breathalyzer test times in the 24 hours time system rather than the a.m.-p.m. system - The technician testified and explained the times in the a.m.-p.m. system - There was no evidence that the accused did not understand the certificate - The Newfoundland District Court held that the use of the 24 hours time system in the certificate did not invalid the certificate.

Evidence - Topic 2275

Judicial notice - Time - The Newfoundland District Court stated that the 24 hours system of time is sufficiently known that the court can take judicial notice of it as an alternative mode of computing time to the a.m.-p.m. system - See paragraph 13.

Cases Noticed:

Deschene v. R. (1982), 18 M.V.R. 91 (N.B.Q.B.), folld. [para. 13].

R. v. Moore (1981), 12 Sask.R. 217; 33 (Sask Q.B.), folld. [para. 13].

R. v. Berehula (1980), 6 Sask.R. 181; 9 M.V.R. 25 (Sask. C.C.), folld. [para. 13].

R. v. Aitkenhead (1980), 8 Man.R.(2d) 395; 4 W.C.B. 345 (Man. C.C.), folld. [para. 13].

Statutes Noticed:

Criminal Code of Canada, R.S.C. 1970, c. C-34, sect. 237(1)(c) [para. 10]; sect. 237(1)(f) [para. 11].

Interpretation Act, R.S.C. 1970, c. I-23, sect. 25(8) [para. 5].

Newfoundland Standard Time Act, R.S.N. 1970, c. 270, sect. 2 [para. 8].

Authors and Works Noticed:

Collins Dictionary of the English Language (1979) [paras. 6, 8].

Counsel:

David Orr, for the appellant accused;

Mark Pike, for the respondent Crown.