SECTION 8 - ASD PROCEDURE REVIEW RESULTS IN CONVICTION
Saturday, March 31, 2018 at 11:09AM Mr. Jennings was charged with exceed .08 and acquitted at trial, and that acquittal was upheld at the first appeal. His defence counsel argued that the basis upon which the officer made the formal breath demand was not objectively reasonable because the officer had not followed three procedures set out in the O.P.P. manual for using the specific ASD, the Drager Alcotest 6810. The Crown's appeal to the Ontario Court of Appeal was allowed, a conviction was entered, and the matter was remitted back to the trial judge for sentencing:
Failure to follow policy or practice manual directions does not automatically render reliance on test results unreasonable. What matters is whether the officer had a reasonable belief that the device was calibrated properly and in good working order, and whether the test was properly administered. R. v. Jennings, 2018 ONCA 260