R. v. Beals

R. v. Beals

Given the totality of the accepted evidence the officer had reasonable grounds to demand a breath sample; the ASD arrived within approximately one minute and the entire screening process occurred within about ten minutes so the demand was made and complied with 'forthwith'; the accused made two inadequate attempts and unambiguously refused further attempts, demonstrating the requisite intent; no credible evidence challenged the ASD's operation so the Crown proved actus reus and mens rea beyond a reasonable doubt and conviction was warranted.

Citation
2010 NSPC 66
Parties
Prosecutor: Her Majesty the Queen; Accused: Gary Archibald Beals
Court
Nova Scotia Provincial Court
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
29 November 2010
Procedural Posture
Criminal Impaired Driving (refusal to Provide Breath Sample) / Trial Judgment
Outcome
Guilty
Legal Topics
Refusal to Provide Breath Sample, Approved Screening Device (asd), Reasonable Grounds to Demand, Meaning of 'forthwith', Calibration and Reliability of Testing Equipment, Admission and Weight of Officer Opinion Evidence
Source Language
English
Criminal Law Evidence Administrative/statutory Compliance Charter Rights Refusal to Provide Breath Sample Approved Screening Device (asd) Reasonable Grounds to Demand Meaning of 'forthwith' +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 6 Authorities cited 15 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Her Majesty the Queen

Prosecutor

Gary Archibald Beals

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal Impaired Driving (refusal to Provide Breath Sample) / Trial Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether officer had reasonable grounds under s.254(2) to demand a breath sample
  2. 2 Whether the accused failed or refused to provide a breath sample forthwith and with the requisite intent (actus reus and mens rea) under s.254(5)
  3. 3 Whether the Crown was required to prove the ASD was calibrated and working properly

Ratio Decidendi

Given the totality of the accepted evidence the officer had reasonable grounds to demand a breath sample; the ASD arrived within approximately one minute and the entire screening process occurred within about ten minutes so the demand was made and complied with 'forthwith'; the accused made two inadequate attempts and unambiguously refused further attempts, demonstrating the requisite intent; no credible evidence challenged the ASD's operation so the Crown proved actus reus and mens rea beyond a reasonable doubt and conviction was warranted.

Court Disposition

Guilty

Orders

  • Found guilty of refusing to provide a breath sample contrary to s.254(5) of the Criminal Code