"FORTHWITH" AND ALSO VEHICLE STOPS ON PRIVATE PROPERTY ANALYZED

It was OK for the police officer to deal with Mr. Anderson on private property for a purely Traffic Safety Act stop because the police officer had formed the intention to stop Mr. Anderson when Mr. Anderson's vehicle was still on a public highway:

To decide otherwise would encourage drivers to seek the sanctuary of private roadways if they suspected they were about to be stopped by police.

It was also OK to wait 16 minutes for the ASD to warm up and become operational as that did not offend the "forthwith" requirement for an ASD sample. Finally, the "clock starts ticking" for "forthwith" not from the time of the initial detention, but rather from the time the officer formed the necessary suspicion:

The so-called “forthwith window,” being the time within which the police officer must require a driver to provide a breath sample, in my view, does not commence prior to the time when a police officer develops a reasonable suspicion that the accused had alcohol in his body, as the trial judge effectively held. Nor does it begin with the ASD demand, as the summary conviction appeal judge held. Rather, it begins when the police officer develops a reasonable suspicion that the accused has alcohol in their body. R. v. Anderson, 2014 SKCA 32