Case Briefs
Database For Canadian Criminal Law

 R. v. Pavel

List of Similar Cases | Add Data to This Case | Edit

Biss Private Use Only Version

 

 

  Home |Add a new case | List of Issues 
Search for a Case by Name, Cite, Issue, Facts and Reasons

Find A Case That Starts With

Canadian lawyers and Judges are invited to add Additional Issues, Facts, Reasons, Anecdotes, History, Comments, Distinguished, Overruled, Approved, Considered, Corrections, or anything else helpful to readers by clicking the Add Data to This Case hyperlink above. 

ID: 94

Title: R. v. Pavel

Cite: 53 C.C.C (3d) 296

Court: ON CA

Date: 22/12/1989

Justices: Howland C.J.O., Morden and Goodman JJ.A.

Result: Crown appeal dismissed

WhoWon: D

Issue: Reasonable & Probable Grounds


Charges: Impaired Driving causing bodily harm and over 80


 

Facts

Section 254(3) demand for blood by officer at hospital other than the one who had formed the belief earlier at the scene. Cst. Waddell had earlier made a 254(3) breath demand based on ASD fail but breath tests were never taken because accused complained of chest pains at police station. Edit


Reasons

The police officer demanding the breath or blood sample must be the same one who formulated the belief. In this case breath demand following ASD fail was valid but later blood demand by another officer not valid because second officer had no info about time of accident. Edit


Issue

Demand by officer other than the one who has the belief respecting offence in last 2 or 3 hours Edit


 Biss Private Use Only


 
Click this link to Add Your Comments about: R. v. Pavel
Click here to Add a Hyperlink re  R. v. Pavel

Biss Private Use Only