R. v. Todoschuk (E.J.), 2012 SKPC 191

• Judge: Klause, P.C.J.
• Court: Provincial Court of Saskatchewan (Canada)
• Case Date: April 20, 2012
• Jurisdiction: Saskatchewan
• Citations: 2012 SKPC 191;(2012), 410 Sask.R. 15 (PC)

R. v. Todoschuk (E.J.) (2012), 410 Sask.R. 15 (PC)

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [2013] Sask.R. TBEd. MR.023

Her Majesty the Queen v. Evan John Todoschuk

(Information No. 24428308; 2012 SKPC 191)

Indexed As: R. v. Todoschuk (E.J.)

Saskatchewan Provincial Court

Klause, P.C.J.

April 20, 2012.

Summary:

The accused was sitting in the driver's seat of his vehicle across the road from a bar. Police noticed that the vehicle was running. The accused stated that he was waiting for a cab. He provided breathalyzer samples that resulted in readings of 0.10 and was charged with impaired driving.

The Saskatchewan Provincial Court acquitted the accused. He was not in care of control of the vehicle.

Criminal Law - Topic 1369

Offences against person and reputation - Motor vehicles - Impaired driving - Care or control or operating - What constitutes - The accused was sitting in the driver's seat of his vehicle across the road from a bar - Police noticed that the vehicle was running - They noticed a slight odour of alcohol - The accused immediately stated that he was just waiting for a cab, had no intent to drive and was not going to drive - He provided breathalyzer samples that resulted in readings of 0.10 and was charged with impaired driving - He testified that he had parked across from the bar because it was safer than the bar's parking lot and it was easier to see a cab arriving - He had started the vehicle to keep warm while waiting for the cab and it had only been running for two minutes when the police arrived - He never drove drunk because he owned a semi and would lose his business if he lost his licence - The Saskatchewan Provincial Court acquitted the accused - His evidence was supported by the police and videotaped evidence - The accused was not in actual care or control of the vehicle - He had established a safe and secure protocol that would prevent him from driving while impaired - His low breathalyzer readings and significant lack of symptoms of gross impairment indicated that he would not have changed his mind and suddenly driven somewhere - The element of "dangerousness" had not been established.

Cases Noticed:

R. v. Toews, [1985] 2 S.C.R. 119; 61 N.R. 349, refd to. [para. 9, footnote 1].

R. v. Shuparski (D.) (2001), 206 Sask.R. 299 (Prov. Ct.), affd. (2003), 232 Sask.R. 1; 294 W.A.C. 1; 2003 SKCA 22, refd to. [para. 9, footnote 2].

R. v. Andersen (P.) (2009), 335 Sask.R. 100; 2009 SKPC 69, revd. [2011] Sask.R. Uned. 211; 2011 SKQB 92, revd. (2012), 399 Sask.R. 1; 552 W.A.C. 1; 2012 SKCA 37, refd to. [para. 9, footnote 3].

R. v. Buckingham (R.A.) (2007), 293 Sask.R. 42; 397 W.A.C. 42; 218 C.C.C.(3d) 203; 2007 SKCA 32, refd to. [para. 11, footnote 4].

R. v. Ogrodnick (C.) (2007), 409 A.R. 56; 402 W.A.C. 56; 2007 ABCA 161, refd to. [para. 11, footnote 5].

Counsel:

Todd Wellsch, for the Crown;

Tom Campbell, for the accused.

This matter was heard at Yorkton, Saskatchewan, before Klause, P.C.J., of the Saskatchewan Provincial Court, who delivered the following judgment on April 20, 2012.