R. v. Gibson

R. v. Gibson

The toxicologist's credible range (40–105 mg/100 ml), taken together with the accused's credible drinking evidence, tended to show the accused's BAC could have been below 80 mg/100 ml at the time of driving, thereby rebutting the presumption of identity under s.258(1)(d.1) and leaving a reasonable doubt; result: acquittal.

Citation
2004 NSPC 40
Parties
Crown (prosecution): Her Majesty the Queen; Accused: Robert Albert Gibson
Court
Nova Scotia Provincial Court
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
21 April 2004
Procedural Posture
Criminal Impaired Driving / Trial (acquittal)
Outcome
Not guilty; acquitted
Legal Topics
Presumption of Identity, Interpretation of S.258(1)(d.1), Breath Analysis Evidence, Straddle Cases, Reasonable Doubt
Source Language
English

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 21 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Her Majesty the Queen

Crown (prosecution)

Robert Albert Gibson

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal Impaired Driving / Trial (acquittal)

  1. 1 Proper interpretation of the phrase "evidence tending to show" in s.258(1)(d.1) of the Criminal Code
  2. 2 Credibility of the accused's evidence about his pattern of alcohol consumption
  3. 3 Whether the toxicologist's range of blood alcohol concentrations rebuts the presumption of identity and shows the accused's BAC was below 80 mg/100 ml at time of driving

Ratio Decidendi

The toxicologist's credible range (40–105 mg/100 ml), taken together with the accused's credible drinking evidence, tended to show the accused's BAC could have been below 80 mg/100 ml at the time of driving, thereby rebutting the presumption of identity under s.258(1)(d.1) and leaving a reasonable doubt; result: acquittal.

Court Disposition

Not guilty; acquitted

Orders

  • Defendant found not guilty and acquitted