DUI DWI DRE: Impaired Driving Lawyer
Unofficial information about this Ontario legislation is provided by the following attorney or lawyer:
DUI, DWI & Criminal Legislation in Ontario
Criminal Code of Canada , section: 254 (3)
Warning: This is NOT a government web site. The information provided herein has NOT been provided by a government. This information has been provided by a lawyer or attorney or student, for the purpose of providing basic information about the laws and regulations enacted by a government and the government offices that apply laws and regulations, and for the purpose of encouraging discussion and facilitating proper legal challenges related to the application of laws and regulations made by government. Citizens always have the right to challenge government. Citizens need independent information not provided by government about government offices, phone numbers, locations, and their services or lack thereof. Please note that the information provided may not be up to date. It is your responsibility to meet with a lawyer or attorney in person to get complete advice. Information provided by some government sites may also be sometimes out of date, sometimes incomplete, or sometimes focused on protection of government politicians, officers, policy initiatives, and interests. It is essential that you retain and instruct an independent lawyer or attorney to represent YOUR interests and inform you accordingly.
DUI Procedure/Evidence, Breath Demand
Samples of breath or blood
(3) If a peace officer has reasonable grounds to believe that a person is committing, or at any time within the preceding three hours has committed, an offence under section 253 as a result of the consumption of alcohol, the peace officer may, by demand made as soon as practicable, require the person
(a) to provide, as soon as practicable,
(i) samples of breath that, in a qualified technicianís opinion, will enable a proper analysis to be made to determine the concentration, if any, of alcohol in the personís blood, or
(ii) if the peace officer has reasonable grounds to believe that, because of their physical condition, the person may be incapable of providing a sample of breath or it would be impracticable to obtain a sample of breath, samples of blood that, in the opinion of the qualified medical practitioner or qualified technician taking the samples, will enable a proper analysis to be made to determine the concentration, if any, of alcohol in the personís blood; and
(b) if necessary, to accompany the peace officer for that purpose.
Comments : Demand for Intoxilyzer or Breathalyzer. Issues include: Reasonable and probable grounds for demand, "within the preceding 3 hours has committed", "forthwith or as soon as practicable", "samples", "opinion of a qualified technician", words of the demand. See refusal offence section 254 (5).
Please note that qualified technicians is entitled to demand "samples". The number of samples is usually two but may be 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, or even 8.
Where more than two samples are obtained the qualified technician should not be completing a Certificate of Qualified Technician but rather should come to Court and give "viva voce" evidence.
Note that the number and quality of samples demanded is "in the opinion of the qualified ... technician necessary to enable proper analysis". It appears that this means that the qualified technician can keep asking you to blow until you consistently blow over 80, even though the instrument has accepted breath samples from you that are below 80. In Ontario the qualified technician can see what you are blowing while you blow and so has the capability of aborting a good breath test under 80.
On the Intoxilyzer 8000C the Ontario software permits the qualified technician to answer the question: Suitable Sample: Y or N following the receipt by the instrument of a breath sample that the instrument has already deemed acceptable as to pressure, time, and slope. Since the breath tech has already seen the instantaneous results of the analysis as the breath is sampled the technician is at that point in a very good position to declare the sample "Unsuitable" if the result is not what he or she wants i.e. over 100 and within 20 mg/100 mls truncated of a prior sample. The instrument has accepted the sample using all of its internal diagnostics and its automatic systems and yet the breath tech is in a position to declare the sample "unsuitable". This seems unfair. The qualified technician in such a case should be asked to provide objective indicia of why the breath sample was declared by him or her to be "unsuitable".
This is not the official web site for the Ontario legislature.
| Privacy |
WARNING: All information contained herein is provided for the purpose of providing basic information only and should not be construed as formal legal advice. The authors disclaim any and all liability resulting from reliance upon such information. You are strongly encouraged to seek professional legal advice before relying upon any of the information contained herein. Legal advice should be sought directly from a properly retained lawyer or attorney.
Warning: This is NOT a government web site.