Drinking & Driving / DUI / Refuse Breath Sample
R. v. P., ONTARIO COURT OF JUSTICE, MILTON, ONTARIO:
The accused, P., was charged with care and control over 80, and impaired care and control. He was found sleeping in his motor vehicle with the engine running. He was searched upon arrest. A half-full bottle of liquor was found in his jacket pocket. He provided samples of his breath into an intoxilyzer. His breath readings were 141 mg%, almost twice the legal limit. Mr. Kostman successfully defended the case, arguing that the investigating officer lacked reasonable and probable grounds to request a breath sample. The breath readings were excluded as evidence.
R. v. M., ONTARIO COURT OF JUSTICE, TORONTO, ONTARIO:
The accused, M., was charged with impaired driving and drive over 80 mgs. Mr. Kostman successfully argued that the delay in bringing the client to trial constituted a breach of section 11(b) of the charter of rights. The charges were stayed.
R. v. S., ONTARIO COURT OF JUSTICE, NEWMARKET, ONTARIO:
The accused S., was followed on a sunday afternoon by an off-duty police officer due to his alleged erratic driving. He was arrested and charged with drinking and driving related offences as a result of intoxilyzer readings of over 300 (approx. 4 times the legal limit). Mr. Kostman represented S., at trial. He was acquitted.
R. v. H., ONTARIO COURT OF JUSTICE, TORONTO, ONTARIO:
The accused, S., was charged with drive over 80 mg. After he was stopped at a ride checkpoint following a rolling stones concert at the air canada centre. S., was employed as a public transit mechanic so the consequences of a criminal conviction relating to the offence would cause him to lose his employment. Mr. Kostman represented s., successfully at trial. The charge was dismissed.
R. v. W., ONTARIO COURT OF JUSTICE, SCARBOROUGH, ONTARIO:
The accused, W., was charged with drive over 80 mg. He had been intercepted during a ride program. Although there were no specific indicia of impairment, W., Provided breath samples of 130 mgs. Mr. Kostman negotiated on his behalf in an attempt to have the criminal charge reduced to a highway traffic act offence. After very significant discussions with the assistant crown attorney, the more serious drinking and driving charge was withdrawn, and the client entered a plea of guilty to the offence of careless driving under the highway traffic act.