R. v. Hall

57 C.C.C (2d) 305

Facts

AL CA

The accused was transported to a detachment and presneted to an individual described as a breathalyzer officer and was seen to blow twice into a machine operated by that officer. The accused was subsequently served with documents including notices of intention to produce those documents. A certificate of analysis by an analyst was intorduced in evidnece. The learned trial judge refused to admit into evidence a document purporting to be a certificate by a qualified tech. The certificate did not say how many samples were taken

Reasons

AL CA

in saying this i do not suggest the learned Provincial Court Judge was wrong in concluding that he was bound by a decision of the Court on Queen Bench. The appeal is allowed and the matter remitted to the learned Provincial Court Judge

contact us

Contact us for an initial consultation.

Stephen R. Biss

Barrister & Solicitor

303-470 Hensall Circle

Mississauga, ON

L5A 3V4

905-273-3322

biss@lawyers.ca

Youth Courts We Cover

We represent young persons at all GTA Youth Court Courthouses including Brampton, Milton, Orangeville, Guelph, and Toronto.

​© Copyright 2020 Stephen R. Biss, Barrister & Solicitor