R. v. Marshall

R. v. Marshall

The court recognized Rilling as the controlling pre-Charter authority that statutory presumptions attaching to breath-analysis certificates are not defeated by unlawful grounds for the breath demand, but because the Supreme Court of Canada had reserved judgment in R. v. Alex which could affect that principle, the court adjourned its verdict to await that higher court decision.

Citation
2017 NSPC 26
Parties
Crown: Her Majesty the Queen; Accused: Shane Marshall
Court
Nova Scotia Provincial Court
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
15 June 2017
Procedural Posture
Criminal Summary Conviction / Trial Complete; Verdict Adjourned Pending Supreme Court of Canada Decision
Outcome
Verdict adjourned to 21 August 2017 at 9:30 a.m.
Legal Topics
Breath Demand, Breath Analysis Certificate, Statutory Presumptions, Exclusion of Evidence, Charter Challenge, R. V. Rilling
Source Language
English
Criminal Law Evidence Constitutional Law Breath Demand Breath Analysis Certificate Statutory Presumptions Exclusion of Evidence Charter Challenge +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 3 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Her Majesty the Queen

Crown

Shane Marshall

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal Summary Conviction / Trial Complete; Verdict Adjourned Pending Supreme Court of Canada Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether breath-analysis results must be excluded because the breath demand was unlawful
  2. 2 Whether statutory presumptions of accuracy and identity apply despite lack of lawful grounds for the breath demand
  3. 3 Whether R. v. Rilling should be reconsidered in light of Charter values and pending Supreme Court authority in R. v. Alex

Ratio Decidendi

The court recognized Rilling as the controlling pre-Charter authority that statutory presumptions attaching to breath-analysis certificates are not defeated by unlawful grounds for the breath demand, but because the Supreme Court of Canada had reserved judgment in R. v. Alex which could affect that principle, the court adjourned its verdict to await that higher court decision.

Court Disposition

Verdict adjourned to 21 August 2017 at 9:30 a.m.

Orders

  • Adjourn verdict to 21 August 2017 at 9:30 a.m.