R. v. Meek

R. v. Meek

Although evidence showed alcohol consumption (smell, red/glossy eyes, some slurred speech, staggering and officer opinion), the driving was not aberrant, alternative innocent explanations existed for several indicia, and on the totality of the evidence the Crown failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant's ability to operate a motor vehicle was impaired by alcohol; therefore acquittal was required.

Citation
2008 NSPC 14
Parties
Crown/prosecution: Her Majesty the Queen; Defendant/accused: Cynthia Adele Meek
Court
Nova Scotia Provincial Court
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
20 February 2008
Procedural Posture
Criminal Impaired Driving (s.253(a) Criminal Code) / Trial Decision (acquittal)
Outcome
Not guilty; acquitted
Legal Topics
Impaired Driving, Burden of Proof, Circumstantial Evidence, Standard of Proof, Care or Control, Charter Rights (mentioned)
Source Language
English
Criminal Law Road Traffic/vehicle Offences Evidence Impaired Driving Burden of Proof Circumstantial Evidence Standard of Proof Care or Control +1 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 5 Authorities cited 26 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Her Majesty the Queen

Crown/prosecution

Cynthia Adele Meek

Defendant/accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal Impaired Driving (s.253(a) Criminal Code) / Trial Decision (acquittal)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defendant's ability to operate a motor vehicle was impaired by alcohol beyond a reasonable doubt
  2. 2 Whether circumstantial indicia of alcohol consumption suffice to prove impairment of driving ability
  3. 3 Proper evaluative weight of driving behaviour and other indicia in proving impairment

Ratio Decidendi

Although evidence showed alcohol consumption (smell, red/glossy eyes, some slurred speech, staggering and officer opinion), the driving was not aberrant, alternative innocent explanations existed for several indicia, and on the totality of the evidence the Crown failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant's ability to operate a motor vehicle was impaired by alcohol; therefore acquittal was required.

Court Disposition

Not guilty; acquitted

Orders

  • Defendant Cynthia Adele Meek found not guilty and acquitted of s.253(a) offence.
  • Charge under s.254 on the same Information was not proceeded with by the Crown and was dismissed.