780-686-7948

Available 24 hrs

Always here for you!

780-686-7948

Call Us Today!

 

Refusing to provide a breath sample

Edmonton Criminal Lawyer Ziv > Impaired Driving  > Refusing to provide a breath sample

Refusing to provide a breath sample

Refusing to Provide a Breath Sample

When stopped by police and asked to provide a breath sample into an approved screening device, should you comply?

As a general rule the answer to this question is “yes”. A police officer requires very little grounds to demand that you provide a sample of your breath into an approved screening device. The law currently in Canada states that all that is required for him/her to have grounds to demand a sample of your breath into an approved screening device is reasonable suspicion to believe there is alcohol in your blood.

How does the officer form this suspicion? There can be many different ways depending on the circumstances.

Admissions

Firstly, the officer may simply ask “have you had anything to drink”. If the answer is yes and this answer can be linked temporally to your driving then that would be enough grounds. In the leading case in Alberta R. v. Flight 2014 ABCA 185 at paras 58 and 61 the following law was pronounced:

In this way, Hnetka is distinguishable on its facts. The driver in Hnetka said that he had something to drink “a while ago.” Where a driver qualifies an admission of consumption temporally, this alone may not be sufficient to ground a reasonable suspicion: see R v Kimmel, 2008 ABQB 594 at paras 34-35, 459 AR 95. Each case must be assessed on its own facts.

In summary, I conclude that in most cases, admission of consumption alone will be sufficient to ground an objectively reasonable suspicion. Reasonable suspicion is a low standard. Police officers are not required to inquire into an alcohol consumption history with a driver at the roadside. However, each case must be assessed on its own facts. Police officers must respond to information as it unfolds.

Indicia

If a motorist does not admit to drinking an officer may still be able to smell alcohol on a motorist’s breath. If the officer is able to convince the trial judge (and on this point he usually can, although, my office has had success in convincing a judge that the officer was mistaken on what he smelled) that he smelled alcohol then that would be enough.  Other indicia would include and accident; slurred speech; blood shot eyes; poor balance and co-ordination etc. etc.

The bottom line

A peace officer needs very little to demand a sample of your breath into an approved instrument. Only unless you are convinced beyond certainty that the officer is simply on a pure fishing expedition without any grounds whatsoever can you refuse in law. This course of action is risky. A refusal conviction is akin to an impaired conviction.

No Comments

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.