Brampton Impaired Driving Lawyer

Drinking and driving is considered a serious offence in Canada due to the serious public safety risk it poses to citizens. The Canadian government has taken a zero tolerance position on impaired driving, including implementing mandatory minimum jail sentences for second time offenders, and mandatory minimum fines and driving prohibitions for anyone convicted. Donich Law has successfully defended second time offenders charged with impaired driving offences.

In 2022, the Firm represented a client charged as a second time offender with impaired driving offences in R. v. A.A. [2022]. Specifically, the accused was charged with drive while disqualified, impaired driving and over .80. The police issued a notice of increased penalty when the accused was released, which indicates that the Crown may seek an enhanced sentence for the accused because they are a second time offender. The case was initially screened for a jail sentence longer than the mandatory minimum due to aggravating factors in the case including the fact that the accused was involved in a minor car accident immediately prior to her arrest. The Firm negotiated with the Crown for more than two years in an attempt to avoid a jail sentence. Ultimately the Firm resolved the matter without the accused having to spend time in jail.

Impaired driving and related offences are a major concern for residents of Brampton, as is true across the country. Recent statistics from Peel Regional Police show that despite the public perception of these crimes, they are no less common in the region over the past few years. Despite fewer charges being laid in 2020 in part due to the COVID-19 pandemic (989), that number was higher in both 2021 and 2022. (1082 and 1008 charges respectively). Already in 2023, charges over the first two months of the year far outnumber those from the same period of last year. (168 against 118)

In 2023, the Firm represented another accused charged as a second time offender in the case of R. v. D.M. [2023]. The client was pulled over by police and charged with impaired driving and over .80 after other motorists reported his erratic driving. The arresting officer indicated it took some time to get the accused to pull over after initiating his lights and sirens, and that the accused appeared confused. It was further alleged that the accused had open and empty containers of alcohol in the front seat of the vehicle when he was pulled over. The Firm moved quickly on the file and was able to hide the prior record for impaired driving. The accused was sentenced to the minimum fine and driving prohibition available.

In addition to individuals who have been charged with impaired driving on multiple occasions, the Firm also has experience defending individuals charged as first-time offenders. Many people in Canada hold misconceptions about impaired driving laws. For example, it is a common misconception that a driver has the right to consult with legal counsel before interacting with the officer at the roadside during an impaired driving investigation. In reality, a driver must immediately comply with the officer’s demand for a breath sample at the roadside. Failing to do so because of an erroneous belief that one has the right to speak with counsel right away is likely to lead to a charge for refusal to comply with demand.

In 2023, the Firm represented an individual charged with refusal in the case of R. v. J.B. [2023]. The accused was initially pulled over by police for failing to move over for an emergency vehicle on the highway. The officer developed suspicion that the driver was intoxicated after speaking with him for a few minutes and made a demand for a roadside breath sample. The driver incorrectly believed that he had the right to contact legal counsel before answering any questions or providing a breath sample. As this is not the case, the officer placed him under arrest. Upon running the accused’s license, it was discovered that his license was currently suspended, and a ticket was issued. The Firm successfully resolved the matter with the lowest possible fine and driving prohibition for the refusal. The Firm secured the withdrawal of the driving while suspended ticket, which carries a significant fine upon conviction.

In 2023, the Firm successfully defended a client who was stopped by police and charged with impaired driving and over .80 in the case of R. v. J.P. [2023]. The client was involved, as a passenger, in a car accident. Prior to police arriving on scene the accused got into the driver’s seat and drove away. He was stopped a short time later and investigated for fleeing the scene of an accident. During their investigation the police developed reasonable suspicion that the driver was intoxicated and placed him under arrest. The Firm was able to resolve the matter by way of a plea to careless driving, avoiding a conviction for impaired driving.

In addition to first time offenders charged with more minor impaired driving offences, the Firm also represents individuals charged in more serious cases, including cases where the impaired driver has hit another motorist. Striking another driver or even property while driving intoxicated is seen as a seriously aggravating factor. Even more so when injuries result.

In 2017, the Firm represented an individual charged with impaired driving offences after hitting a motorcyclist on the Gardiner Expressway in Toronto in R. v. M.V. [2017]. Witnesses reported seeing the accused walking away from his vehicle down the shoulder of the highway. When police arrived, the accused failed a roadside breath test and was taken to the station to complete a breathalyzer test. The test revealed the accused had more than 250 mg of alcohol per 100 ml of blood, more than three times the legal limit. The Firm resolved the matter with a low position by way of a joint position on sentencing. The presiding judge was unhappy with the position and indicated he would have sentenced the accused more harshly, however, given the joint position he was prohibited from doing so.