Client was drinking at a pub and went outside to have a cigarette. It was a cold winter night so the client sat in her car to stay warm as she smoked. Police arrived and saw her sitting in her vehicle outside the pub, they made a breath demand and the client failed the ASD test. Client was issued an IRP and hired Ms. Forhan. Ms. Forhan obtained evidence from the bartender that the client had left her jacket inside and not paid her bill. Ms. Forhan put forward this evidence along with affidavit evidence from the client and won the IRP hearing after convincing the adjudicator that the client had no intention of driving, despite being in the driver’s seat with the keys in the ignition.
Immediate Roadside Prohibition Cases
Police followed the client into his apartment building underground parkade. Once inside, they made an ASD demand requiring him to provide a breath sample. The client failed his ASD tests and hired Ms. Forhan to dispute his IRP. Ms. Forhan identified a 16 minute delay in the officer’s report from when he formed his reasonable suspicion and when the breath test was administered. Ms. Forhan successfully argued that this 16 minute delay amounted to a breach of the client’s Charter rights that could not be saved by s. 1. Ms. Forhan also argued that the demand was made on private property which is not permitted. Ms. Forhan won on both arguments.
Client was pulled over while driving after he swerved due to being distracted while texting on his phone. Upon being stopped, the police officer made a roadside ASD demand. The client failed both his ASD tests despite not having drank any alcohol that day. After speaking with the client Ms. Forhan learned he had consumed cough syrup and hired an independent forensic alcohol expert to draft an expert report confirming that the recent consumption of cough syrup invalidated the ASD tests. The IRP was revoked on the basis of unreliable ASD tests.
Client was pulled over after leaving a restaurant where she consumed a single glass of white wine. The client suffered from GERDS, commonly known as acid reflux. Due to the acid reflux, the client had stomach acid enter her esophagus which contained traces of the white wine causing her to fail both of her ASD tests. Ms. Forhan hired an independent forensic alcohol expert to draft an expert report confirming that the recent consumption of cough syrup invalidated the ASD tests. The IRP was revoked on the basis of unreliable ASD tests.
Client was issued an IRP after failing two breath attempts. Ms. Forhan had the client dispute her IRP and advise RoadSafetyBC that she was represented by Mickelson & Whysall. Ms. Forhan noted that the police officer attempted to submit his report outside of the limitation date. Ms. Forhan drafted legal submissions to RoadSafetyBC and successfully argued that the officer failed to act in accordance with the Motor Vehicle Act and BC Interpretation Act. Ms. Forhan was successful and the IRP was cancelled immediately.
Client went out for dinner with his girlfriend and consumed a moderate amount of alcohol. The client was pulled over leaving the pub and required to provide two breath samples; he failed both ASD tests. Based on the client’s reported drinking pattern, his blood alcohol content [BAC] should have been below the legal limit. There was no explanation for why the ASD machines malfunctioned and the client did not save his receipt from dinner that night to prove how much alcohol he had consumed.
There was a report to the police about a motor vehicle accident. The witness observed the driver in the driver’s seat, with their seat belt on and with the keys in the ignition. The driver admitted to the police that they were driving when they lost control of the vehicle and it went into the ditch. The driver blew for “fail” readings. The driver was issued a 90 day Immediate Roadside Prohibition.
The police officer stated that he saw the accused drive and park the vehicle in the driveway. The accused denied that they were driving and that the officer witnessed any driving as the officer did not arrive on scene until after the vehicle was parked. The accused provided one “Fail” reading. The driver was issued a 90 Day Immediate Roadside Prohibition.
The driver was stopped by the police for speeding. The officer noted an overwhelming odour or mouthwash. The driver denied consuming any alcohol. The officer demanded the driver provide a sample of breath. The driver provided two “Warn” readings. The driver was issued a 3 Day Immediate Roadside Prohibition.
The driver was observed by police to be swerving and speeding down the road. The officer attempted to stop the suspect vehicle unsuccessfully. The officer followed the suspect vehicle home. The officer noted the driver was staggering and had a strong odour of alcohol. The officer made a breath demand into an Approved Screening Device (ASD) on the driver’s property. The driver refused to provide a breath sample to police. The driver was issued a 90 Day Immediate Roadside Prohibition.
The driver was stopped at a road block. The officer noted a strong odour of alcohol on the driver and the driver was unsteady on his feet. The officer made a breath demand. The driver provided two “Fail” readings. The devices were calibrated properly and were not expired. The driver was issued a 90 Day Immediate Roadside Prohibition.
The driver was observed speeding by the police. The officer failed to include in his report that he had temporarily lost visual contact of the driver when the driver returned into an establishment to retrieve their driver’s license. The office noted an odour of alcohol and breath and the driver admitted to consuming alcohol. The officer made a breath demand into an Approved Screening Device. The driver provided two “Fail” readings. The driver was issued a 90 Day Immediate Roadside Prohibition.