|
|
|
Nasma's Case — Over 80 — Dismissed Client: Nasma G., Accused Background: Nasma was a charming up-and-coming young woman completing her medical studies in one of the north-eastern states. She was enjoying a visit at home here in Toronto, but suffered the misfortune of being caught for driving with too much alcohol in her blood. After providing breath samples indicating that she had 140 milligrams of alcohol in 100 millilitres of blood, she was charged with the offence commonly known as "over 80." In addition, there was an insult added to her injury. Not normally being a resident in Toronto anymore, Nasma needed to come up with a $500 deposit to be released. On her arrest, she was confused and didn't want to involve her parents. As a result, she ended up spending five harrowing days in custody (over a long weekend) before being released in Court before a Justice. Goals: Nasma was concerned about how this case might affect her career. Her focus and instructons were very clear. She wanted me to do whatever I could to beat this charge. Strategy: Since "over 80" is a very technical offence, it is subject to many technical defences. There are many details the Crown must prove in order to secure a conviction on an over 80 matter, and a failure to prove any one of them could prove fatal (see ARCHIE'S CASE). In Nasma's case, I focused upon the time it took the police to take the first breath sample. The Crown must prove that both breath samples were taken "as soon as practical," and a failure to prove this fact could result in the charge being dismissed (see EARL'S CASE ). In Nasma's case, the police officer had waited 30 minutes for a tow truck to arrive to pick up her car. If this delay wasn't sufficiently explained at trial, the charge would likely be dismissed. We scheduled the trial, and waited patiently for the big day to arrive. Results: Nasma had taken a break from her studies, and had travelled from the U.S. for her trial here in Toronto. She had every expectation that the case would finish that day, as she had delayed her exams in the hope that the case could first be finalized. We arrived at the Court house at Old City Hall in Toronto fully prepared for trial. I quickly learned two facts which proved vitally important: first, our Court room was very busy; and, secondly, the arresting officer in our case was the victim in another case also taking place that very morning one floor up from us. In the end, these two facts conspired against the Crown as follows: (i) the arresting officer was not available to testify when Nasma's trial started; (ii) the Judge refused the Crown's request for an adjournment; (iii) the Crown was forced to proceed without witnesses; and (iv) the charge was dismissed. You can read the transcript below for further details. |
|
DISCLAIMER: Information on this site is not intended as legal advice. If you have a legal problem, seek advice from a lawyer. |