R. v. Blakeney

R. v. Blakeney

The court found the accused's drinking account and the expert opinion based on it unreliable in light of police observations and high breathalyzer readings; there was no evidence that the approved instrument malfunctioned or readings were falsified, so the presumption of accuracy was not displaced and the Crown proved beyond a reasonable doubt that the accused's BAC exceeded the legal limit, warranting a conviction on s.253(b) and a conditional stay on s.253(a).

Citation
2005 NSPC 42
Parties
Crown: Her Majesty the Queen; Accused: Gary Alan Blakeney
Court
Nova Scotia Provincial Court
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
30 September 2005
Procedural Posture
Criminal Impaired Driving / Provincial Court Decision (guilty Finding)
Outcome
Guilty on Criminal Code s.253(b) (blood alcohol over legal limit); conditional stay entered on s.253(a) (impaired driving)
Legal Topics
Impaired Driving, Blood Alcohol Concentration, Presumptions Under S.258, Breathalyzer Evidence, Expert Toxicology Evidence, Presumption of Accuracy, Presumption of Identity
Source Language
English
Criminal Law Traffic Offences Evidence Impaired Driving Blood Alcohol Concentration Presumptions Under S.258 Breathalyzer Evidence Expert Toxicology Evidence +2 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Her Majesty the Queen

Crown

Gary Alan Blakeney

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal Impaired Driving / Provincial Court Decision (guilty Finding)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the accused adduced evidence to rebut the presumption of accuracy under s.258(1)(g)
  2. 2 Whether the accused adduced evidence to rebut the presumption of identity under s.258
  3. 3 Whether the breathalyzer readings were reliable and accurate

Ratio Decidendi

The court found the accused's drinking account and the expert opinion based on it unreliable in light of police observations and high breathalyzer readings; there was no evidence that the approved instrument malfunctioned or readings were falsified, so the presumption of accuracy was not displaced and the Crown proved beyond a reasonable doubt that the accused's BAC exceeded the legal limit, warranting a conviction on s.253(b) and a conditional stay on s.253(a).

Court Disposition

Guilty on Criminal Code s.253(b) (blood alcohol over legal limit); conditional stay entered on s.253(a) (impaired driving)

Orders

  • Conviction entered on Criminal Code s.253(b) (driving with blood alcohol concentration over legal limit)
  • Conditional stay entered on Criminal Code s.253(a) (impaired driving)