Law360 Canada ( October 6, 2022, 6:05 AM EDT) -- Appeal by the appellant of the decision of the trial judge to not exclude the appellant’s breath readings and subsequent conviction. The officer stopped the appellant’s car. Because of his interactions with the appellant and his observations, the officer formed a suspicion that the appellant was operating a motor vehicle while having a blood alcohol level in excess of the legal limit. The officer had the appellant exit the car. He read the appellant the demand to blow into an approved screening device (“ASD”) but he did not have the unit on hand. He requested another officer to bring an ASD to his location. There was no dispute that the officer offered the appellant to sit in the back of the police cruiser while they waited for the ASD to arrive. However, the officer and the appellant provided different evidence about whether the appellant was then handcuffed. The trial judge found that the Charter breach resulted from a mistake by an inexperienced officer and that, despite the significant concern for the impact of handcuffing on individual liberty and dignity, she was not satisfied that admitting the evidence would send a message that this conduct was permissible and thereby bring the administration of justice into disrepute....