Verdun-Jones Case

837 Words2 Pages

In some cases the Crown does not have to prove that the accused was conducting the act, the Crown only has to prove that the accused was found in a particular state or condition (Verdun-Jones, 2015, p. 29). The accused being in control of a motor vehicle while being impaired is one of these cases (Verdun-Jones, 2015, p. 29). If the impairment no matter how slight is proven by evidence then the offence must go through (Stellate, 1993). In this particular case the defendant, Codlin was found behind the wheel of his car while being impaired (Verdun-Jones, 2015, p. 49). The breathalyzer test proving that Codlin’s blood alcohol was over eighty (Verdun-Jones, 2015, p. 49) which satisfied the first element of actus reus under section 253 (1) of the …show more content…

49) so it can be argued that the next element of actus reus was not fulfilled as he did not have control over the vehicle. The intention to set the vehicle in motion can create the risk of danger to persons or property because of this intention is considered by the court (R. v. Boudreault, 2012). Since the keys to the motor vehicle were in the pocket of the accused, it is clear that the accused did not have the intention to set the vehicle in motion. With this the accused established that the purpose of sitting in the driver’s seat was not to set the vehicle in motion which satisfies section 258 (1)(a) of the Criminal Code. Since the keys were in the pocket of the accused there was no risk of him accidently operating the vehicle, and there was only a slight risk of the accused trying to intentionally operate the vehicle that could be argued against …show more content…

If the driver is intoxicated sitting behind the wheel of their vehicle with the intention of setting the vehicle in motion once they decided they are no longer impaired, they pose a realistic risk to persons and property. This precedent was first set in Hatfield (1997) when the appellant’s argument that at the moment his only intention was to sleep. This logic was used next in the Coleman (2012) case when the accused had the intention to put the car into motion once he felt better after taking a short nap. In the case of Codlin an alternative plan had been implemented as well as the keys had been removed from the ignition. This showed that he had no intention of setting the vehicle in motion even if he decided he no longer felt

Open Document