Albert Provincial Court Judgement - 21 - R v Ul-Huq.pdf
Item
Dublin Core
Title
Albert Provincial Court Judgement - 21 - R v Ul-Huq.pdf
Creator
Alberta Provincial Court
Publisher
Alberta Provincial Court
Date
2021
Zotero
Abstract Note
7 pages.
"Criminal law --- Offences against the person and reputation — Driving/care or control with excessive alcohol [over 80] Presumption of alcoholic content at time of offence
— Reasonable and probable grounds Accused was charged with impaired driving and driving with excessive alcohol — Officer stopped accused's vehicle for speeding and noted that accused fumbled when searching for documents — When asked if he had been drinking alcohol, accused replied "a little bit" — Officer made approved screening device (ASD) demand and accused failed subsequent ASD test — Accused applied to exclude evidence based on breach of s. 8 Charter rights — Application dismissed
— There were both subjectively and objectively reasonable grounds for officer to ground suspicion that accused was operating vehicle with alcohol in his body, and to make ASD demand. Criminal law --- Charter of Rights and Freedoms — Arrest or detention [s. 10] — Right to counsel [s. 10(b)] — Miscellaneous Accused was charged with impaired driving and driving with excessive alcohol
— Accused was arrested for impaired driving, was read his rights to counsel, and told officer that he wanted to call lawyer whose name he had in his wallet — When accused was unable to locate slip of paper with lawyer's name, officer told him that he could use Legal Aid, phone books, or waive his right to lawyer — After being uncertain as to which option he should choose, accused finally decided to call Legal Aid sixteen minutes after starting process of contacting lawyer — Accused applied to exclude evidence based on breach of right to counsel
— Application dismissed — Accused was never put in room with phone books because he never asked for that opportunity Accused did not communicate that he wished to call lawyer other than his own lawyer, whose name he could neither remember nor access — Accused personally narrowed his options by indicating that he might be interested in contacting Legal Aid Officer bent over backwards to assist accused in contacting counsel, and urged him to get legal advice even though accused offered to provide breath samples without doing so
— Accused was given plenty of time to choose who to call — Accused was well aware of his Charter rights, and police acted in good faith by going above and beyond legal requirements."
"Criminal law --- Offences against the person and reputation — Driving/care or control with excessive alcohol [over 80] Presumption of alcoholic content at time of offence
— Reasonable and probable grounds Accused was charged with impaired driving and driving with excessive alcohol — Officer stopped accused's vehicle for speeding and noted that accused fumbled when searching for documents — When asked if he had been drinking alcohol, accused replied "a little bit" — Officer made approved screening device (ASD) demand and accused failed subsequent ASD test — Accused applied to exclude evidence based on breach of s. 8 Charter rights — Application dismissed
— There were both subjectively and objectively reasonable grounds for officer to ground suspicion that accused was operating vehicle with alcohol in his body, and to make ASD demand. Criminal law --- Charter of Rights and Freedoms — Arrest or detention [s. 10] — Right to counsel [s. 10(b)] — Miscellaneous Accused was charged with impaired driving and driving with excessive alcohol
— Accused was arrested for impaired driving, was read his rights to counsel, and told officer that he wanted to call lawyer whose name he had in his wallet — When accused was unable to locate slip of paper with lawyer's name, officer told him that he could use Legal Aid, phone books, or waive his right to lawyer — After being uncertain as to which option he should choose, accused finally decided to call Legal Aid sixteen minutes after starting process of contacting lawyer — Accused applied to exclude evidence based on breach of right to counsel
— Application dismissed — Accused was never put in room with phone books because he never asked for that opportunity Accused did not communicate that he wished to call lawyer other than his own lawyer, whose name he could neither remember nor access — Accused personally narrowed his options by indicating that he might be interested in contacting Legal Aid Officer bent over backwards to assist accused in contacting counsel, and urged him to get legal advice even though accused offered to provide breath samples without doing so
— Accused was given plenty of time to choose who to call — Accused was well aware of his Charter rights, and police acted in good faith by going above and beyond legal requirements."
Date
2021
Publisher
Alberta Provincial Court
Short Title
21 - R v Ul-Huq.pdf
Title
Albert Provincial Court Judgement - 21 - R v Ul-Huq.pdf
Attachment Title
21 - R v Ul-Huq.pdf
Collection
Citation
Alberta Provincial Court, “Albert Provincial Court Judgement - 21 - R v Ul-Huq.pdf,” Deobfuscating State Surveillance, accessed May 20, 2024, https://surveillance.glendon.yorku.ca/items/show/901.