Tag Archives: speeding

New Laws to Target High Drivers

It is common knowledge that driving drunk can lead to criminal charges. But what if you are driving high?

Currently, under section 253 of the Criminal Code, it is an offence to drive “impaired” and it is an offence to drive with a blood alcohol level of over 80 milligrams per 100 mL of blood (known in criminal law circles as “driving over 80”).

Drivers who have not been drinking but who are stoned or high generally don’t have to worry about the “over 80” offence, but they can be charged for driving “impaired”. Indicators of driving impaired may include:

Erratic driving
Dilated pupils/reddened eyes
Failing a “standard field sobriety test” (inability to walk-and-turn, standing on one leg)
Failing a “drug recognition evaluation” (examination of various factors including pupil size, blood pressure, injection sites, balance test)
Blood/urine drug tests

Because “impairment” can be subjective and difficult to prove (even blood and urine tests may be unable to establish “impairment” at the time of the offence), it has been rarer for people to be charged with drug-related impaired driving offences.

Bill C-46 sets out to change Canada’s approach to high drivers. The bill proposes amendments to the current impaired driving law that create “over 80” style rules for drivers on drugs. Accompanying regulations will define allowable “blood drug concentrations” and drivers who are caught driving with concentrations that exceed the new limits could be criminally charged. Until regulations are created and the new law comes into force, the current law stands.

BILL C-75: MAKING AN UNFAIR PROCESS WORSE

by Alison Craig

On March 29, 2018, Bill C-75 was introduced for its first reading in the House of Commons. Proponents of the Bill argue that it will bring about a “cultural shift” in the justice system, speed up the process, and unclog the courts. The Bill makes significant changes to the jury selection process – changes which result in more unfair trials, less cultural diversity on juries, and a greater potential for wrongful convictions. Gone will be peremptory challenges, which allow counsel for the accused (and the Crown) to exclude a limited number of jurors without having to provide a reason.
Continue reading →

THE CASE FOR THE PRELIMINARY INQUIRY

by Brian Eberdt

Last month, the federal government announced Bill C-75, which is legislation that would change many sections of the Criminal Code. They would change how juries are selected, how bail hearings are conducted, sentencing, and the availability of preliminary inquiries. The reaction to Bill C-75 has been significant and mixed. The reaction from criminal defence lawyers has been almost entirely negative. In this article, I address the impact that Bill C-75 would have on the preliminary inquiry and why these changes are a poor solution to address the problem of lengthy waits for trials.
Continue reading →