Critics of British Columbia’s immediate bans for impaired driving have a new arrow in their quiver in defending drunk-driving bans, after the B.C. Supreme Court ruled on Monday that a government report on the roadside screening devices should have been inadmissible during the review process.
The report was used by a government adjudicator to reject an appeal by Angela Buhr that her roadside ban – which included an immediate driving prohibition and her car being impounded on the spot – should have been thrown out because of a problem with the screening device, a portable breathalyzer that critics have argued is too unreliable for such harsh, instant penalties.
In Ms. Buhr’s case, the issue was over the device’s internal temperature, which the police officer had registered at 9 C., below the minimum operating temperature of 10 C. When Ms. Buhr tried to use the device (after failing a first test on a different device), it didn’t register a result and the police officer wouldn’t allow another attempt.
The decision opens the way for the overturning of other adjudicator decisions that relied on the report, which could number in the hundreds.
“It was used all the time. We definitely have cases, and we were just trying to pull up estimates from our office, and we’d say maybe 150,” said criminal defence lawyer Paul Doroshenko. His firm represented Ms. Buhr and has been a persistent opponent of the immediate roadside prohibition program.
Read more: Ruling could lead to quashing of hundreds of drunk-driving bans, lawyer says
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/british-columbia/roadside-drunk-screening-questioned/article13750930/
(Note: Photo is of a service record for Alco-Sensor IV 093986 from New Westminster BC, a device that appears to have had chronic problems)