Impaired driving trial. Issue regarding whether ASD test performed “forthwith”. Accused stopped at a Checkstop at 2:20 am. Admission of consumption. Officer instructed the accused to exit his vehicle and walk 6 metres to the police vehicle where a screening demand was read at 2:35 and the test performed at 2:36 hours.
Held: Breaches of ss 8 and 10(b), certificate excluded.
Regarding s 254(2) CC: “[t]he demand should be made as soon as is reasonably possible, that is, allowing only such delay as is reasonably necessary to enable the police officer to carry out his duties”: Marshall (2011), 16 MVR (6th) 93 (Alta Prov Ct). No evidence as to when the officer formed a reasonable suspicion, therefore, Court unable to conclude that the demand was made “forthwith”. Onus to prove a lawful 254(3) demand rests with the Crown.
G. Dunn – Defence Counsel