Vancouver Criminal Law

OUR LOCATIONS:

Vancouver: 604 685 8889
Richmond: 604 370 3050
Surrey: 604 593 8580
Victoria: 250 384 0100
Kelowna: 250 860 2766
Fort McMurray: 780 750 7588

Facebook

Twitter

Copyright 2016 Acumen Law Corporation.
All Rights Reserved.

Call 24 Hrs

604 685 8889

Call Us For Free Consultation

Facebook

Twitter

Search
Locations
 

IRP Case Results – Lawyer Sacha Roudette

Most successful in BC for Roadside Prohibition Cases

Victoria Lawyer Sacha Roudette knows IRP cases inside and out. She not only worked on the successful constitutional challenge of the original IRP legislation, she has argued countless front line Roadside Prohibition cases before the tribunal. Read some of her Immediate Roadside Prohibition Case Results below.

IRP Case Results - Lawyer Kyla LeeRe: 3-MONTH IMMEDIATE ROADSIDE PROHIBITION (CLIENT 3823)

 

Lawyer: Sacha Roulette

Client was issued a 90-day IRP for failing two ASD tests in Richmond.

 

CASE FACTS:

Client received a 90-day IRP after failing two Approved Screening Device tests in Richmond. The officer failed to observe a proper delay for mouth alcohol contamination caused by recent consumption and the use of medication containing alcohol. Lawyer Sacha Roudette ensured that the client also obtain a forensic expert report to assist the client’s defence regarding the effect of the medication on the ASDs.

 

ARGUMENT:

The evidence shows that due to the combination of recent consumption and the use of medication containing alcohol, it is not possible for the tribunal to be satisfied the approved screening devices were reliable. The unreliability of both ASD tests also results in a violation of the right to a second analysis and the right to have the lower of the two test results govern.

 

HELD: PROHIBITION LIFTED

The tribunal was satisfied that the ASD results were unreliable.

Re: 3-MONTH IMMEDIATE ROADSIDE PROHIBITION (CLIENT 3777)

 

Lawyer: Sacha Roudette

Client was issued a 90-day IRP for failing an ASD test in Victoria.

 

CASE FACTS:

Client received a 90-day IRP after failing an Approved Screening Device test in Victoria. Lawyer Sacha Roudette identified an error in the officer’s recording of the status messages during the sole ASD test.

 

ARGUMENT:

The sole ASD test was unreliable. The officer’s failure to accurately monitor the testing was made even more egregious in light of the violated right to a second analysis.

 

HELD: PROHIBITION REVOKED

The tribunal was satisfied that the ASD results were unreliable.

Re: 3-MONTH IMMEDIATE ROADSIDE PROHIBITION (CLIENT 3716)

 

Lawyer: Sacha Roudette

Client was issued a 90-day IRP for failing an ASD test in Sidney.

 

CASE FACTS:

Client received a 90-day IRP after failing an Approved Screening Device test in Sidney. Lawyer Sacha Roudette identified an inconsistency in the calibration record provided when compared with other calibration records obtained in other cases.

 

ARGUMENT:

The Qualified ASD Calibrator was using expired calibration gas. The evidence provided showed many cases where the date was expired.

 

HELD: PROHIBITION CANCELLED

The tribunal was satisfied that the ASD results were unreliable.

Re: 3-MONTH IMMEDIATE ROADSIDE PROHIBITION (CLIENT 3707)

 

Lawyer: Sacha Roudette

Client was issued a 90-day IRP for failing an ASD test in Qualicum Beach

 

CASE FACTS:

Client was stopped by police on his way home from work after having consumed only 1 beer within less than 5 minutes of the stop. There was conflicting evidence between the officer’s evidence and the client’s evidence regarding the time of last drink. The officer’s sworn report was not dated, and the officer then submitted corrected evidence in an attempt to fix the improperly sworn report.

 

ARGUMENT:

TThe original report was not properly sworn as per the Evidence Act, and this error could not be corrected by submitting a supplementary report. Further, the Narrative describing the events was not admissible and the tribunal was not entitled to consider this report. The client’s evidence was properly sworn and therefore must be given more weight.

 

HELD: PROHIBITION LIFTED

The officer’s evidence was not admissible in the hearing. The tribunal was satisfied that the ASD results were unreliable.

Re: 3-Month Immediate Roadside Prohibition (Client 3709)

 

Lawyer: Sacha Roudette

Client was issued a 90-day IRP for failing to provide breath samples into a roadside breathalyzer.

 

CASE FACTS:

Client was stopped by police. The officer failed to note sufficient evidence to form a suspicion there was alcohol in his body and to issue a valid ASD demand under the Criminal Code. The officer simply stated that the client would “have to blow.” The client questioned the officer’s grounds for the demand.

 

ARGUMENT:

Client and witness provided sworn evidence that at no time did the officer issue a valid ASD demand. Lawyer Sacha Roudette argued that jurisprudence throughout BC has supported the interpretation that an ASD demand made with insufficient indicia is invalid. Further, the officer did not issue a valid ASD demand pursuant to the requirements of the Criminal Code. The client therefore could not have refused to comply with an invalid ASD demand.

 

HELD: PROHIBITION REVOKED

The officer failed to issue a valid ASD demand.

Re: 3-Month IRP for Blowing Fail Twice (Client 3688)

 

IRP Lawyer: Sacha Roudette

Client was issued a 90-day IRP for failing two ASD tests in Ladysmith.

 

CASE FACTS:

Client received a 90-day IRP after failing two Approved Screening Device tests in Ladysmith. The officer failed to observe a proper delay for mouth alcohol contamination by regurgitation. Lawyer Sacha Roudette ensured that the client also obtain a forensic expert report to assist the client’s defence regarding the effect of the regurgitation on the ASDs.

 

ARGUMENT:

Client submitted sworn evidence that he had repeatedly belched and regurgitated prior to both ASD tests, but the officer took no notice of this behaviour. Since IRPs are served based only on the results of a screening device, it is incumbent on the officer to ensure reliability. The forensic evidence demonstrates that the client’s BAC would have been below .08%, and further, that mouth alcohol by regurgitation could result in falsely high readings. The unreliability of both ASD tests also results in a violation of the right to a second analysis and the right to have the lower of the two test results govern.

 

HELD: PROHIBITION LIFTED

The tribunal was satisfied that the ASD results were unreliable.

Re: 90-Day IRP Immediate Roadside Prohibition for “Fail” (Client 3667)

 

IRP Lawyer: Sacha Roudette

Client was issued a 90-day IRP after failing two ASD tests in Quesnel.

 

CASE FACTS:

Client received a 90-day IRP after failing two Approved Screening Device tests in Quesnel. The officer failed to meet the statutory deadline for submitting evidence.

 

ARGUMENT:

The prohibition must be revoked. The client is under the same deadline as the officer, and the tribunal would be biased to now accept police evidence in violation of this mandatory duty. The police must be given no advantage regarding the statutory deadlines to produce evidence to support a prohibition.

 

CASE RESULTS: PROHIBITION LIFTED

The officer failed to submit evidence pursuant to the mandatory duties under the MVA.

Re: 90-Day IRP Immediate Driving Prohibition for “Fail” (Client 3621)

 

IRP Lawyer: Sacha Roudette

Client was issued a 90-day IRP for failing a sole ASD test in Nanaimo.

 

CASE FACTS:

Client was observed leaving a liquor store parking lot. Had consumed 2 beers while driving and had open alcohol in the vehicle. Officer made note of the empty beer can in the driver side door.

 

ARGUMENT:

Client submitted sworn evidence that he was stopped by police and admitted to having consumed alcohol while driving. Showed the officer the empty beer cans. The officer neglected to ascertain the time of last drink. Lawyer Sacha Roudette argued that this is a case of likely mouth alcohol contamination and the officer ought to have observed the proper delay to avoid falsely high readings.

 

CASE RESULTS: PROHIBITION LIFTED

The tribunal was satisfied that the ASD results were unreliable. IRP REVOKED

Re: 90-Day IRP Immediate Driving Prohibition for “Fail” (Client 3602)

 

IRP Lawyer: Sacha Roudette

Client was issued a 90-day IRP for failing two ASD tests.

 

CASE FACTS:

Client received an IRP in December 2015. The officer submitted evidence pursuant to observations made by other officers, and submitted an unsworn supplementary report. Client had provided sworn evidence that he consumed no alcohol that day; however, he had consumed alcohol the evening prior and had vomited immediately prior to the ASDs tests. There were also further issues regarding the officer’s failure to follow proper procedure ASD testing. Client was not successful at the review hearing. Lawyer Sacha Roudette appealed the decision to the B.C. Supreme Court. After reviewing submissions from Ms. Roudette the Government agreed to a re-hearing. The prohibition was then revoked.

 

 

ARGUMENT:

The tribunal cannot ignore conflicting evidence regarding the testing procedure and evidence of having vomited prior to the ASD tests. The tribunal cannot make inferences that are not in evidence regarding the reliability of the test results, and misappropriate the corroborating forensic expert evidence.

 

CASE RESULTS: PROHIBITION LIFTED

The tribunal was satisfied that the ASD results were unreliable.

Call us at 604-685-8889 for a free consultation and learn how we can successfully help you.

IRP Case Results – Lawyer Sacha Roudette was last modified: by