So are there defences to these charges? I will keep it very simple in terms of the defences. Number 1, there has to be a valid breath demand. Now that sounds pretty easy for the crown to prove. The police just read from a pre-printed card and make a valid demand. However, it is amazing how often the police make a mistake and I will give you one example. The police will read the breath demand which is a formal demand and then they ask the person, “Do you want to provide a breath sample?” In other words, the police merely ‘ask’ the person to provide a breath sample by saying something like, “Do you want to provide a breath sample.” They don’t say you have to provide breath samples and I am demanding you provide breath samples. A person is entitled to refuse if it’s merely a wish or a want or an ‘ask’ where it appears the person actually has a choice regarding whether to provide a breath sample or not. No, I don’t want to provide a breath sample. Will you provide a breath sample? No, you are asking me if I want to and I don’t want to. In other words, the police are required to make a clear demand that the person has no choice but to comply with the demand or they will be charged with a refusal. There is extensive case law on this issue and we have won many cases where the police did not make a valid breath demand. If the police do not make a valid breath demand, a person can refuse to provide a breath sample and have a reasonable chance of winning their case at trial. There is a difference between a demand and the police merely wanting or wishing that the detainee will provide a breath sample or asking them if they will provide a breath sample. It really has to be very clear to the person that the police are demanding that they provide a breath same. So the police have to make an unequivocal and clear demand and that includes of course either reading the exact words from their pre-printed breath demand cards when they make the demand or stating words similar to what is printed on the card to make if very clear that they are demanding breath samples and not merely asking the accused if they want to provide a breath sample.
The right to counsel under s. 10(b) of the Charter is a very fertile area here as well. If your right to counsel is breached, you can potentially have your refusal excluded at trial. There are thousands of reported decisions in Canada on right to counsel Charter issues. It sounds easy for the police to provide an accused with their right to counsel properly and it is not necessarily a cut and dry issue. Our lawyer studies these cases every day. They come off the computer across the Ontario criminal court system in our offices every day. Charter applications are served and filed and lawyers across the province including our law firm, win a lot of right to counsel cases where the judge never even gets to consider the breath reading. The alleged refusal gets excluded at trial (i.e. thrown out) and the accused wins their refusal charge.
The other defence is where there is a reasonable excuse to refuse to provide breath samples and I will give you examples of a reasonable excuse. A medical condition could be a reasonable excuse. You’ve got broken ribs. You’ve got a compromised lung system. You’ve got asthma. That sort of thing. So there are various defences to refusal or failure to comply with a breath demand charges. A good lawyer can find those defences and give you the legal advice you need. It doesn’t make sense just to go to court and plead guilty without a lawyer. It really pays to have somebody look at your case to try and get you the best result they can or hopefully win your case. Sometimes we even get careless driving guilty offers if there is a good defence based on a Charter application, for example. So there is kind of a short synopsis of dealing with refusal charges and the consequences.
Contact Us
Complete the form below to get a free meeting and quote.