R. v Trainor Brown

R. v Trainor Brown

Because there was a realistic possibility of significant post-accident consumption (bolus drinking) supported by the presence of an open, mostly-empty bottle, the accused's testimony admitting post-crash drinking, and officer observations of intoxication, the Crown failed to disprove bolus drinking beyond a reasonable doubt; consequently the expert extrapolation could not be relied upon to prove BAC at time of driving and the accused was found not guilty.

Citation
2020 NSPC 28
Parties
Prosecution: Her Majesty the Queen; Defendant: Tara Trainor Brown
Court
Nova Scotia Provincial Court
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
29 June 2020
Procedural Posture
Criminal Impaired Driving / Trial Judgment (decision on Trial)
Outcome
Acquitted (not guilty)
Legal Topics
Impaired Driving, Bolus Drinking/post Accident Consumption, Presumption of Identity (s.258), Expert Opinion Admissibility, Section 8 Charter (search and Seizure)
Source Language
English
Criminal Law Evidence Constitutional Law Forensic Toxicology Impaired Driving Bolus Drinking/post Accident Consumption Presumption of Identity (s.258) Expert Opinion Admissibility +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 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 7
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Her Majesty the Queen

Prosecution

Tara Trainor Brown

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Impaired Driving / Trial Judgment (decision on Trial)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the breath evidence was admissible following Charter s.8 analysis
  2. 2 Whether the Crown proved beyond a reasonable doubt that no bolus drinking occurred after the accident
  3. 3 Whether the accused's blood alcohol concentration at the time of driving exceeded the legal limit given tests taken more than two hours after the incident

Ratio Decidendi

Because there was a realistic possibility of significant post-accident consumption (bolus drinking) supported by the presence of an open, mostly-empty bottle, the accused's testimony admitting post-crash drinking, and officer observations of intoxication, the Crown failed to disprove bolus drinking beyond a reasonable doubt; consequently the expert extrapolation could not be relied upon to prove BAC at time of driving and the accused was found not guilty.

Court Disposition

Acquitted (not guilty)

Orders

  • Accused found not guilty on the s.253(1)(b) impaired driving charge
  • Crown not seeking conviction on the s.253(1)(a) count