R. v. Rowland

14 M.V.R. (2d) 261

Facts

AL CA

This was an appeal from a conviction for failing to provide breath samples. After sobriety tests an officer told the accused that he seemed all right. The accused was then detained and told to move his truck. The trial judge did not find whether the officer had the subjective belief required by s. 37(2) of the Criminal Code.

Reasons

AL CA

The appeal was allowed and the conviction was quashed. Under the section two findings were required: whether the officer believed the accused committed an offence within the past two hours and whether he had probable and reasonable grounds to so believe. The evidence required a specific finding by the trial judge as to the officer's specific belief and the failure to make such a finding was an error in law.

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