Whether it was reasonable to make breathalyzer demand not made at trial and should not be entertained on appeal
Criminal Law - OFFENCES AGAINST THE PERSON AND REPUTATION - Offences relating to vessels
Accused had several alcoholic drinks and drove boat into tree, harming passengers. Accused convicted of two counts of operating motor vessel while impaired, and appellant was sentenced to 18 months’ imprisonment, 12 months’ probation, and two-year driving prohibition Restitution, non-contact and victim surcharge orders were also imposed. Accused appealed sentence and conviction. Appeal dismissed regarding conviction and sentence varied. Conviction was based on totality of evidence, including evidence of alcohol consumption, and while particular element of conduct of accused might not have been consistent only with impairment, conclusion was properly based on all circumstances. There were reasonable and probable grounds for arrest, and police properly investigated accident. Argument regarding whether it was reasonable to make breathalyzer demand had not been made at trial and should not be entertained on appeal.
R. v. Ballantine (2019), 2019 CarswellOnt 9503, 2019 ONCA 498, Alexandra Hoy A.C.J.O., C.W. Hourigan J.A., and David M. Paciocco J.A. (Ont. C.A.).
Case Law is a weekly summary of notable civil and criminal court decisions by the Supreme Court of Canada, the Federal Court of Canada and all Ontario courts. These cases may be found online in WestlawNext Canada. To subscribe, please visit store.thomsonreuters.ca
