R. v. Jaycox (D.A.) 2012 BCCA 365
Civil Rights - Right to counsel - Right to be advised of
The British Columbia Provincial Court, in a decision cited as 2010 BCPC 140, acquitted the accused of charges of impaired driving and failing to comply with an Approved Screening Device (ASD) demand, contrary to ss. 253(1)(a) and 254(5) of the Criminal Code. The Crown appealed the acquittal on the charge of failing to comply with the ASD demand.
The British Columbia Supreme Court, in a decision reported at  B.C.T.C. Uned. 662, set aside the acquittal and entered a guilty verdict. The accused sought leave to appeal.
The British Columbia Court of Appeal, per Chiasson, J.A., in a decision reported at (2012), 316 B.C.A.C. 209; 537 W.A.C. 209, granted leave to appeal.
The British Columbia Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal. The court held that the summary conviction appeal judge did not err in law in holding that the implicit suspension of the s. 10(b) Charter right to counsel recognized in R. v. Thomsen (S.C.C.) applied to the current wording of s. 254(2) of the Code (as amended by the trial judge).