The accused appealed his conviction for driving while over .08. At trial, the defence argued that the certificate did not prove that the accused's blood alcohol level exceeded 80. The certificate read .200 and .190 milligrams of alcohol in 100 milliliters of blood. The judge found that it was simply a typographical error and convicted the accused. The appellate court held that the trial judge was not entitled to make such an assumption and correct the certificate without evidence being led that it was an error. R. v. Michel, 2011 SKQB 356