Purchase Book

4th Edition $95.00 + (S&H)

 

* If you have problems making a credit card payment, contact us for alternative payment options.

* For discounts on book orders over 5, please email us at:

MapleBookPublications@gmail.com


Table of Contents
View the 4th Edition table of contents.
Reviews of Investigating Impaired Drivers
Saturday
Jan052013

SECTION 254(3) - A BREATH DEMAND IS REQUIRED

The officer did not testify that she made a breath demand. [The Court concluded] that it is good law that the failure to lead any evidence as to the existence of a demand (by anyone at any time in the process) is fatal to the leading of any evidence of breath test results. R. v. Haniff, 2012 ONCJ 697

Remember to make (and remember to testify that you made) the breath demand.

Tuesday
Jan012013

MADD 2012 LEGISLATIVE REVIEW

The 2012 Mothers Against Drunk Driving (MADD) Canada Legislative Review lists Ontario as having the lowest per-capita rate of impaired driving deaths and Saskatchewan as having the highest.  The Canadian national average impaired driving death rate is 3.18 per 100,000 population (2009 statistics).  Ontario ranks lowest at 2.03, Quebec at 2.15, Newfoundland and Labrador at 2.82, B.C. at 3.60, Nova Scotia at 4.57, Manitoba at 4.86, Prince Edward Island at 5.58, New Brunswick at 5.58, Alberta at 5.70 and Saskatchewan ranking highest at 8.44. MADD Canada's 2012 Provincial and Territorial Legislative Review

Sunday
Dec232012

SANTA GETS BUSTED

Santa gets busted - 2012 edition.

Sunday
Dec232012

AS SOON AS PRACTICABLE - REASONABLE EXPLANATIONS BY THE INVESTIGATING OFFICER ARE IMPORTANT

The accused appealed his conviction for exceeding .08.  Defence counsel argued that the breath samples were not obtained as soon as practicable. The appeal was dismissed and the Court referred to an earlier case, R. v. Bazil, 2012 BCSC 274,  in stating what is required by an investigating officer: " .. the correct approach is to ask whether there is a reasonable explanation for any delay and in assessing that reasonableness whether it is logically connected to the officer's duties in relation to investigating the incident."  The Court concluded that the officer in Mr. Agnew's case provided reasonable explanations for each step that was taken and that each step taken was connected to his routine investigatory duties.  R. v. Agnew, 2012 BCSC 1905

Saturday
Dec222012

EVIDENCE TO THE CONTRARY - COURT ACCEPTS TESTIMONY FROM QUALIFIED TECHNICIAN REGARDING PROPER OPERATION AND FUNCTIONING OF INSTRUMENT

The accused was convicted at trial of driving while over .08. Defence counsel appealed and argued that there was evidence that the Intoxilyzer 5000C was malfunctioning because it did not print out a final test result. Crown counsel submitted that the trial judge accepted the evidence of the operator who was a qualified technician...

Click to read more ...