The certificate filed at Mr. Rosenberg's trial read:
THAT at Julius Richard ROSENBERG (sic), in the Province of Manitoba, pursuant to a demand under Section 254(3) of the Criminal Code of Canada, I did take two samples of breath of a person identified to me as Julius Richard ROSENBERG, ...
Counsel for Mr. Rosenberg argued that the place where the samples of breath were taken was not stated and the Court of Queen's Bench of Manitoba agreed: Where the Criminal Code provides for a legislative evidentiary shortcut that enables the Crown to prosecute its case against an accused more efficiently by utilizing certificate evidence in place of calling one or more witnesses, the enabling section of the Criminal Code must be strictly construed and the certificate itself must fully comply with the applicable section of the Criminal Code. The certificate of analysis that was admitted into evidence by the trial judge did not state where each sample was taken. Therefore the certificate of analysis ought not to have been accepted by the trial judge as evidence of the blood alcohol count of the accused. R. v. Rosenberg, 2012 MBQB 304