Getting convicted for driving under the influence means that
a DUI charge will be linked to your name. This link will be there for years to
come until such time that you’re able to get a record suspension or a DUI
pardon with the help of a DUI lawyer.
But what constitutes impaired driving?
Is it impaired driving if you simply slept in your parked car
while waiting for the effects of alcohol intoxication to go away?
Would you be fine with going to jail for sleeping in your car
when you’re drunk because you did not want to drive until you are feeling much
better?
Location, Location,
Location!
What defines impaired driving or driving under the influence
differs widely between provinces and territories. In a 2016 case in Ontario, a drunk
man was found sleeping inside his car which was parked outside a housing
complex in Burlington. He was charged with DUI.
The Ontario ruling by Justice Alan D. Cooper stated that the
man, Ryan Toyota, was not guilty of any criminal offences despite leaving the
engine and the exterior lights on because of several factors. One factor is
that he meant to stay in a friend’s house but got locked out. Another is that
he had to stay inside the car because this occurred in February 2015 in
sub-freezing temperatures.
The ruling focused on a section of the Criminal Code which
establishes the presumption of care or control of the vehicle – stating that
the risk of danger is a fundamental element of care and control.
In the court’s opinion, they believed that Mr. Toyota had no
intention of driving his vehicle and that the engine was just left on to keep
himself warm. They also believed that Mr. Toyota had no means of getting inside
his friend’s home because the homeowner passed out after accidentally locking
the door on the way in.
The court said that it was clear that Mr. Toyota intended to
spend the night in his friend’s home and made do with the safer course of
action when given no other options except staying in his car or driving home.
What Really Happened
The police report did say that they found the defendant inside
his vehicle which was parked outside the housing complex in sub-zero
temperatures. The officer opened the door and smelled alcohol so he asked Mr.
Toyota to step out and found that he was intoxicated. Mr. Toyota was then
arrested and brought to the police station to be tested.
Real Justice
Justice Cooper noted in his ruling that the data from the
police clearly stated that Mr. Toyota’s car was parked properly and in no
danger to anyone at the time the police officer found him. Although there was a
realistic risk of the defendant choosing to drive in his intoxicated state, the
fact remains that he did not.
The court also believed that although Toyota’s blood alcohol
level was lot higher than what defines legally drunk, it is highly unlikely
that he would have suddenly change his mind and go driving if the officer didn’t
find him. At the end of the day, the details of the circumstances dictated the
court’s ruling.
