R. v. Tweedie

Parties

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Trial Judgment

Legal Issues

1. 1 Whether accused drove in a manner dangerous to the public causing death contrary to s.320.13(3) of the Criminal Code
2. 2 Whether accused had BAC >=80 mg/100ml within two hours of ceasing to drive and that caused the death contrary to s.320.14(3)
3. 3 Whether accused failed to stop, give name/address and offer assistance knowing or being reckless that the collision involved a person or caused death contrary to s.320.16

Ratio Decidendi

Crown failed to discharge its burden on counts 1-3: toxicology extrapolation to >80 mg/100ml was undermined by realistic evidentiary possibility of recent ('bolus') drinking within 30 minutes so reasonable doubt existed; evidence did not establish dangerous driving as a marked departure given road condition, lighting, lack of reliable indicia of impairment and possibility that the accused legitimately believed he hit a deer; accused therefore neither knew nor was reckless that he had struck a person. Conviction entered only on obstruction count by guilty plea under s.129(a).

Court Disposition

Accused acquitted on counts: dangerous driving causing death (s.320.13(3)), impaired driving causing death (s.320.14(3)), failure to stop/offer assistance after accident resulting in death (s.320.16); convicted (by plea) of wilful obstruction of a peace officer (s.129(a)).

Orders

• Counts 1 (dangerous driving causing death), 2 (impaired driving causing death), and 3 (failure to stop/offer assistance) dismissed; accused found not guilty on those counts
• Count 4 (wilful obstruction of a peace officer contrary to s.129(a)) convicted on guilty plea