DUI & IRS Recent Cases Cases

Our client was charged with impaired operation after her car was stopped on Hwy 2 near Airdrie. The officer involved requested that a roadside breath demand be conducted. After failing the roadside breath test N.G. was taken to the RCMP detachment where she provided 2 breath samples over the legal limit. Ms. G was facing a potential jail sentence as she had previous convictions for impaired offences. Historically, officers have required grounds to request that a driver provide a roadside sample. Due to recent amendments in the Criminal Code, officers can now require any driver to provide a sample provided they have an approved screening device on their person. In N.G.’s case, the officer had no grounds for the breath test. Mr. Wyman initiated a Constitutional Challenge to the new legislation arguing that it violated the client’s section 8 Charter right to be free from unreasonable search and seizure. This argument eventually carried the day and the client’s charges were dismissed without the need for a trial.

This client was charged with impaired operation of a motor vehicle when Calgary City Police initiated a traffic stop after observing him leave a local liquor store. After smelling alcohol, a roadside test was requested which produced a “fail.” J.B. was then taken back to the local district office where he provided 2 samples which both exceeded the legal limit. The client was an 18-year-old University student with no prior criminal record. Mr. Wyman identified an error with respect to the fashion in which the officer provided the accused his rights to counsel. After filing a comprehensive constitutional argument in this regard, the Crown discontinued the prosecution.

The client, a northern Alberta welder, was charged with his 5th impaired driving offence out in Peace River. Should a conviction follow, the client was looking at a very lengthy jail sentence. Prior to trial, Mr. Wyman filed written argument, alleging that the client’s arrest was unlawful and that the breath samples procured (which were more than 3 times the legal limit) ought to be suppressed. Notwithstanding the high blood alcohol readings and the prior convictions, this argument carried the day. All charges against the accused were withdrawn.

Our client was an 18-year-old charged with impaired operation of a motor vehicle. A fantastic student and devoted cadet leader, a conviction for this offence would be devastating to say the least. At trial, Mr. Wyman filed a charter notice alleging a violation of the client’s section 10(b) right to counsel. Prior to the commencement of the trial, Crown Counsel agreed with Mr. Wyman’s arguments and consequently withdrew the criminal charges against his client. S.M. was thus free to continue on the career path she had worked so hard to pursue.

The client, an EMT out of Northern Alberta, had just gotten off a lengthy job on a well site. He began to drive home but was too tired to drive to Calgary. He pulled over in an Edson parking lot to sleep. Prior to doing so, he consumed a number of beers while in the driver’s seat. Local RCMP located the truck running, with N.J. passed out behind the wheel. The client was charged with impaired care or control of the motor vehicle. The matter was resolved by way on a conditional discharge for the lesser charge of public nuisance. This resolution permitted the client to maintain his license and ensured that he not receive a criminal record.

The client was 18 years old with no prior criminal record. He was observed by Banff RCMP with an obstructed license plate. When a traffic stop ensued, officers noted indicia of impairment and requested a roadside breath sample. When a “fail” was registered on the device, the client was arrested for impaired operation of a motor vehicle and brought to the RCMP detachment for breath testing. The client ultimately provided 2 breath samples at the detachment, both of which exceeded .08 mg/%. At trial, Mr. Wyman argued that the client’s section 10(b) Charter rights had been violated, in that the client was not given an adequate opportunity to speak with counsel. This argument carried the day and resulted in our client walking away with an unblemished criminal record.