R. v. Vallentgoed (D.J.C.), (2015) 602 A.R. 90

• Judge: Wakeling, J.A.
• Court: Court of Appeal (Alberta)
• Case Date: June 09, 2015
• Citations: (2015), 602 A.R. 90;2015 ABCA 202

R. v. Vallentgoed (D.J.C.) (2015), 602 A.R. 90; 647 W.A.C. 90 (CA)

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [2015] A.R. TBEd. JN.068

Her Majesty the Queen (applicant) v. Darren John Chip Vallentgoed (respondent)

(1503-0098-A)

Her Majesty the Queen (applicant) v. Kevin Patrick Gubbins (respondent)

(1503-0099-A; 2015 ABCA 202)

Indexed As: R. v. Vallentgoed (D.J.C.)

Alberta Court of Appeal

Wakeling, J.A.

June 12, 2015.

Summary:

These two summary conviction appeals dealt with the same issue: disclosure of maintenance logs of approved breath instruments used to take breath samples of accused persons.

The Alberta Court of Queen's Bench, in a decision reported at [2015] A.R. TBEd. AP.029, held that maintenance logs of the breathalyzer machine were relevant and were first party records. They had to be disclosed to the accused person in the first instance; no disclosure voir dire was required. The Crown sought leave to appeal.

The Alberta Court of Appeal, per Wakeling, J.A., granted leave to appeal.

Editor's Note: The trial decision regarding the second appeal is reported at (2014), 596 A.R. 351 (Prov. Ct).

Criminal Law - Topic 1384.4

Motor vehicles - Impaired driving - Production of breathalyzer maintenance records or data - Two summary conviction appeals were heard together - They both dealt with the same issue: disclosure of maintenance logs of approved breath instruments used to take breath samples of accused persons - Kenny, J., held that "[t]he driver's license of an individual charged with these offences is suspended pending resolution of the matter. The maintenance logs of the breathalyzer machine are relevant and are first party records. They must be disclosed to the accused person in the first instance. No disclosure voir dire is required. In the event that the defence calls expert evidence related to the functioning of the machine, the Crown can respond at that time." - The Crown sought leave to appeal - The Alberta Court of Appeal, per Wakeling, J.A., granted leave to appeal where, inter alia, "Justice Kenney, in her reasons in this case, expressed a desire for appellate intervention: ... 'There has been a wave of litigation in this area. The matter needs to move on to the Court of Appeal'. The likelihood that she would have said this is very low had she thought that The Queen v. St-Onge Lamoureux [2012 S.C.C.] ... definitively resolved the questions the Crown asks for leave to present to a panel of this Court." - See paragraph 34.

Criminal Law - Topic 7607

Summary conviction proceedings - Appeal to a court of appeal - When available - General - [See Criminal Law - Topic 1384.4 ].

Cases Noticed:

R. v. St-Onge Lamoureux (A.) (2012), 436 N.R. 199; 2012 SCC 57, consd. [para. 2, footnote 2].

R. v. Stinchcombe, [1991] 3 S.C.R. 326; 130 N.R. 277; 120 A.R. 161; 8 W.A.C. 161, refd to. [para. 6, footnote 4].

R. v. Gubbins (K.P.) (2014), 596 A.R. 351; 2014 ABPC 195, refd to. [para. 14, footnote 8].

R. v. Sutton (T.A.) (2013), 576 A.R. 14; 93 Alta. L.R.(5th) 109; 2013 ABPC 308, refd to. [para. 18, footnote 12].

R. v. Caswell (J.A.) (2015), 599 A.R. 254; 643 W.A.C. 254; 2015 ABCA 97, refd to. [para. 23, footnote 15].

R. v. Evans (B.M.) (2014), 584 A.R. 263; 623 W.A.C. 263; 316 C.C.C.(3d) 437; 2014 ABCA 339, refd to. [para. 23, footnote 15].

R. v. Dufault (V.I.), [2014] A.R. Uned. 241; 2014 ABCA 271, refd to. [para. 23, footnote 15].

R. v. Bennett (B.T.) (2004), 354 A.R. 6; 329 W.A.C. 6; 2004 ABCA 116, refd to. [para. 23, footnote 15].

R. v. D.C.A., [1999] A.R. Uned. 210; 1999 ABCA 244, refd to. [para. 23, footnote 15].

R. v. Chaluk (K.W.) (1998), 237 A.R. 366; 197 W.A.C. 366 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 23, footnote 16].

Hutterian Brethren of Wilson Colony et al. v. Alberta, [2009] 2 S.C.R. 567; 390 N.R. 202; 460 A.R. 1; 462 W.A.C. 1; 2009 SCC 37, refd to. [para. 26, footnote 18].

R. v. White (J.K.), [1999] 2 S.C.R. 417; 240 N.R. 1; 123 B.C.A.C. 161; 201 W.A.C. 161, refd to. [para. 26, footnote 18].

Sahaluk v. Alberta (Transportation Safety Board), 2015 ABQB 142, refd to. [para. 26, footnote 18].

Mackey v. Montrym (1979), 443 U.S. 1, refd to. [para. 26, footnote 18].

Osman Auction Inc. v. Edmonton (City) et al. (2015), 602 A.R. 55; 647 W.A.C. 55; 2015 ABCA 135, refd to. [para. 28, footnote 19].

R. v. Govenlock (G.W.) (2015), 599 A.R. 316; 643 W.A.C. 316; 2015 ABCA 122, refd to. [para. 28, footnote 21].

R. v. R.R. (2008), 238 O.A.C. 242; 2008 ONCA 497, refd to. [para. 29, footnote 22].

R. v. Proctor (S.V.), [2015] A.R. TBEd. MR.028; 2015 ABQB 97, refd to. [para. 30, footnote 24].

R. v. Sinclair (C.D.), [2015] A.R. Uned. 206; 2015 ABQB 113, refd to. [para. 30, footnote 24].

R. v. Kilpatrick (D.K.) (2013), 555 A.R. 110; 2013 ABQB 5, leave to appeal denied [2013] A.R. Uned. 160; 2013 ABCA 168, refd to. [paras. 30, 33, footnotes 24, 26].

Counsel:

J.R. Russell, for Her Majesty the Queen;

S.K.C. Prithipaul, for Darren John Chip Vallentgoed;

T.E. Foster, for Kevin Patrick Gubbins.

This application for leave to appeal was heard on June 9, 2015, by Wakeling, J.A., of the Alberta Court of Appeal, who delivered the following decision on June 12, 2015.