Impaired Driving Library Display

New impaired driving legislation is coming into effect on December 16, 2019 that adds stricter penalties for impaired driving, including immediate roadside prohibition.

These new rules are summarized here.

To help understand these changes, we have displayed relevant print and online resources.

For print items in the library see:

  • Impaired driving in Canada (4th edition) by Joseph F. Kenkel
  • Defending drinking and driving cases by Alan D. Gold
  • A guide to breathalyzer certificates in Canada by Alan Pearse
  • Impaired driving in Canada, 2012-2013 ed. By Joseph F. Kenkel
  • Impaired driving in Canada by Joseph F. Kenkel
  • Impaired driving and breathalyzer law : recent case law prepared by Keith R. Hamilton
  • Breathalyzer law in Canada : the prosecution and defence of drinking and driving offences (4th edition)
  • Journal of motor vehicle law

In our online collection we have:

From the Emond collection available behind the member’s portal,
Impaired driving and other criminal code driving offences: A practitioner’s handbook by Karen Jokinen , Peter Keen

And from the Irwin Law collection on desLibris:
Drug-Impaired Driving in Canada by Nathan Baker

As well as eNewsletters such as
Impaired Driving NetLetter(TM) by the Hon. Justice Joseph F. Kenkel

Decisions of the Week – Sentencing

We get many requests for decisions on sentencing, particularly where parties are aware of a particular sentence, however, often the decision is not reported. Last month the Provincial Court of Manitoba published several sentencing decisions, some of which are highlighted here.

R. v. Alcantara, 2019 MBPC 67 challenged the constitutionality of the mandatory minimum sentence for the offence of luring.

[1]          …. Counsel agree that the Court should first determine the fit and appropriate range of sentence, given this offender’s personal circumstances and need not examine the constitutional issue if the Court determines that the fit and appropriate sentence is within the range set out by the mandatory minimum. On the other hand, if the Court determines that a one year sentence is grossly disproportionate for Mr. Alcantara, the constitutionality of the sentencing provision is engaged, and the Court must determine if one year in jail amounts to cruel and unusual punishment for Mr. Alcantara.

R. v. Alcantara (Rolston, P.J.)

R. v. Little, 2019 MPBC 60 concerns the appropriateness of a joint sentencing submission. Along with a pre-sentence report, the Court ordered a supplementary Gladue-style appendix for further consideration of the offender’s circumstances.

[45]        … I am therefore, given his youth, his vulnerability and his Gladue and s. 718.2(e) factors (which apply to all offenders), of the view that the jointly proposed sentence should not be confirmed, that something less will be adequate and purposeful in the offender’s unique and most unfortunate circumstances. …

R. v. Little (Corrin, P.J.)

R. v. Goodman, 2019 MBPC 77 describes the difficulty of arriving at an appropriate sentence when the offender, with a diagnosis of Fetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorder commits a serious offence.

[1]            Sentencing is often described as more of an art than a science.  This is because although the Criminal Code sets out sentencing principles, the Court must still balance them in light of the circumstances of the offence and the offender. 

R. v. Goodman (L.M. Martin, P.J.)

All of these decisions offer significant analysis in their reasons and guidance for future sentences. The library also has other resources available for finding sentencing decisions, in print and e-book format. Please don’t hesitate to contact us for help crafting your submissions on sentencing.

Notice to the Profession

On behalf of Public Prosecution Service of Canada:

Regarding Fentanyl and Acetylfentanyl Certificates

Since February 22, 2018, all Fentanyl Certificates of Analyst that the Public Prosecution Service of Canada has received from Health Canada’s Drug Analysis Service have stated that they analysed the substance to be “Fentanyl or an isomer thereof.” The Controlled Drugs and Substances Act (CDSA) Schedule I, item 16, does not list “isomers” as one of the included substances of Fentanyl. However, we have recently been advised by Health Canada that Fentanyl, as listed at subitem 16(5) in Schedule I of the CDSA, and Acetylfentanyl, not listed but captured under item 16 in Schedule I of the CDSA, currently have no known isomers that could have been seized and analyzed by Health Canada. As a result, for all Certificates of Analysis that say “fentanyl, or its isomers”, the substance referred to was Fentanyl, and for “Acetylfentnayl, or its isomers”, the substance referred to was Acetylfentanyl.

For a copy of the Health Canada notice or any further information about this subject, please contact Health Canada at https://www.canada.ca/en/health-canada/services/healthconcerns/controlled-substances-precursor-chemicals/drug-analysis-service.html#a3 or your local PPSC office at 515-234 Donald, Winnipeg, Manitoba R3C 1M8 or Janna Hyman, General Counsel, (204) 984-0493.

Gladue Reports Database Update

Way back in May 2018, I wrote about a project out of Saskatchewan to create a database for researching Gladue principles. This resource was going to operate under a subscription model, but has just received funding to make it open access. Content is from Saskatchewan, however, researchers in other jurisdictions will likely find it a useful starting point. It would be even better if other jurisdictions found a way to add on to it.

For now, congratulations to the Law Society of Saskatchewan, Legal Aid Saskatchewan and the Ministry of Corrections and Policing for having the foresight to develop and fund this resource.

H/t to The Lawyers’ Daily: Creators of novel Gladue database hope it becomes widely used after free access

New Product – Criminal Law Series

We are thrilled to announce additional digital criminal law content available to all members: Emond Publications award-winning Criminal Law series.

Emond’s award-winning Criminal Law Series offers clear, concise guidance on the practical and procedural aspects of criminal law. Ideally suited for members of the criminal bar and judiciary, this collection covers discrete areas of criminal practice, anchored by the expertise of General Editors Brian H. Greenspan and Justice Vincenzo Rondinelli. Most titles are authored by both defence and Crown counsel, lending balance and comprehensiveness to the series.

Emond.ca

These e-books are accessible by signing in to the member’s portal, clicking on the “Library Resources” on the left hand navigation panel, and then scrolling to the bottom of the page. Don’t miss out on our other resources there, like Rangefindr.ca, a criminal sentencing digest. Go to our “Legal Ease” page for guides on how to use these products if you have difficulty, or contact us at library@lawsociety.mb.ca.

Decision of the Week – Employer Charged With Workplace Fatality

This week’s decision comes from Nova Scotia. I found there were two very interesting facets to it that warranted bringing to the attention of members in Manitoba.

R. v. Hoyeck, 2019 NSSC 7 concerns an employer who was charged with failing to take reasonable steps to prevent bodily harm to an employee. The trial began before a judge and jury, but after two days, the jury was dismissed. After jury selection, one of the jurors sent a note to the judge about investigation into his LinkedIn account by the Crown (para. 3). As noted in this article by Norm Keith at Fasken:

The jury was discharged after one of the prosecutors, Mr. Keaveny was the subject of controversy about his use of social media to investigate prospective jurors. 

Nova Scotia Employer Acquitted in Westray Bill Prosecution

The benefit of this development is there is now additional case law on the subject of the responsibility of an employer in the death of an employee. There is a very high standard of proof required to convict an employer of Occupational Health and Safety criminal negligence. In this instance, the employee was a licensed Red Seal Mechanic and more qualified in his work than the owner. Although Chipman, J. was critical of the employer in his workplace practices:


Based on all of the evidence it is impossible for me to conclude beyond a reasonable doubt that Mr. Hoyeck did anything or omitted to do anything (that was his duty to do or not do) such that he is guilty of criminal negligence causing death.  …

R. v. Hoyeck, para. 94

Please note: The library will be closed on Tuesday, July 1st, 2025 for Canada Day.  Regular library service will resume Wednesday, July 2nd at 8:30AM.