The Scenario

My client was arrested for impaired driving and refusal to provide a breath sample. The matter proceeded to trial, and both charges were ultimately dismissed. The charge of refusal to provide a breath sample was dismissed at the request of the Crown because I brought a section 7 charter application which argued that as a result of abuse by the police officer, the charges should be dismissed. The impaired driving charge was dismissed after trial because there was not sufficient evidence to establish beyond a reasonable doubt that my client’s driving was impaired by alcohol.

My client and two friends of his went out to a few bars on the night in question. My client had only consumed a few beers because he was the designated driver. On the way home they decided to attend the local McDonald’s drive-through for some food. One of the employees at McDonalds, believing that my client had been drinking, called the police. Two police vehicles arrived, and my client was asked to exit his vehicle and was arrested for impaired driving. As my client was being escorted to the police vehicle, he questioned why he was being arrested and in so doing one of the police officers became upset. Then, the police officer intentionally or unintentionally hit my client’s head on the side of the police vehicle and as a result – my client blacked out.

My client’s next recollection is when he arrives at his friend’s place the next morning. We come to learn, through disclosure, that in the interim my client refused to provide a breath sample at the police station and was charged with refusing to provide a breath sample.

Our Process

At trial I argued that as a result of the abuse inflicted by the police officer, my client did not have the intention to refuse to provide a breath sample. I also argued that the actions of the police officer in hitting my client’s head against the police vehicle was an abuse of process and as such, both charges should be dismissed. At trial, with respect to the charge of failure to provide a breath sample, the crown decided to invite the Judge to dismiss that charge.

After trial – on the impaired driving charge – I argued that there was not sufficient evidence to establish that my client’s ability to drive was impaired by the consumption of alcohol on that evening and the Judge agreed and subsequently dismissed that charge.

Get the Best Defence: DV Pledge 

It is important when looking for a criminal defence lawyer that you find one that is not afraid to bring arguments that suggest that the police acted inappropriately in the process of arrest or in processing you. Some criminal defence lawyers are fearful of bringing such arguments to the table.

I, Donna Pledge, wholeheartedly believe in providing full answers and defence to all my clients. And if that requires accusing the police of any form of wrongdoing, then that’s what I will do. I am here to ensure my clients’ rights are protected.

Call 416-630-8702 or click here to email. 

Donna V. Pledge, Barrister & Solicitor 

Donna V Pledge, is a highly experienced criminal lawyer in Toronto with over twenty-five years of experience in the area of criminal offences. She has been successfully defending clients since 1992. She has earned the reputation of a tough and no-nonsense lawyer who can get her clients out of any criminal case with either a full acquittal or a very light sentence. Donna Pledge represents her clients in courts all over Ontario.