Criminal Defence · Drug-Impaired Driving (Cannabis DUI)

Drug-Impaired Driving Lawyer in Ontario

Reviewed by Fadi Matthew Kazandji, Founding Partner, Kazandji Law · Toronto criminal defence · Last reviewed: July 2026

A drug-impaired driving charge in Toronto often starts with something completely ordinary — a lane change on the Gardiner, a RIDE checkpoint on a Friday night, an officer who says your eyes look red or your speech seems slow. Cannabis is legal, so many drivers are stunned to learn that having used it hours earlier can end in handcuffs, an immediate 90-day licence suspension, and a criminal charge that shows up at the U.S. border for the rest of their life. The reassuring part is that a charge is only an allegation, and drug-DUI cases are among the most scientifically and procedurally contestable in the entire Criminal Code.

At Kazandji Law, our criminal defence team represents drivers charged with cannabis and drug-impaired driving, and the full range of related driving offences, across Toronto and the Greater Toronto Area. This page explains what you are actually facing under the 2018 impaired-driving regime, what the prosecution must prove, why the science linking THC to impairment is genuinely contested, and the defences that most often lead to a charge being withdrawn or dismissed. If you would rather talk it through now, call 647-588-3234 for a free, confidential consultation.

One thing to understand from the outset: drug-impaired driving is not treated leniently just because cannabis is legal. The offences carry the same mandatory minimum penalties as alcohol-impaired driving, they can be prosecuted as indictable offences, and the law applies fully to people who use cannabis with a medical authorization. That is precisely why early, strategic advice matters so much.

What is drug-impaired driving under Canadian law?

Since Bill C-46 came into force on December 18, 2018, all of Canada's transportation offences sit in a modernized part of the Criminal Code, and the central impaired-driving provision is section 320.14. It creates several distinct ways to commit an impaired-driving offence, and a drug-DUI file can be charged under more than one of them at the same time. Understanding which subsection you face is the first thing an experienced lawyer pins down, because the elements — and the defences — are different for each.^[1]

Impairment "to any degree" by a drug — s. 320.14(1)(a)

The foundational offence is at section 320.14(1)(a), which makes it a crime to operate "a conveyance while the person's ability to operate it is impaired to any degree by alcohol or a drug or by a combination of alcohol and a drug."^[1] Two features of this wording matter enormously. First, "to any degree" means the Crown does not have to prove gross intoxication — any measurable impairment of your ability to drive can suffice. Second, this offence is not tied to a number at all: it is proved through evidence of how you were actually driving and how you presented (coordination, speech, cognition), not through a blood-concentration reading. That makes it heavily dependent on officer observations, which are fertile ground for cross-examination.

The "per se" blood-drug offences — s. 320.14(1)(c) and (4)

Parliament also created "per se" offences that do not require proof of impairment at all — only proof of a prohibited concentration of a drug in your blood within two hours of driving. Section 320.14(1)(c) makes it an offence to have, "within two hours after ceasing to operate a conveyance, a blood drug concentration that is equal to or exceeds the blood drug concentration for the drug that is prescribed by regulation."^[1] A companion "lower-level" offence at section 320.14(4) captures a concentration that is over a lower prescribed limit but below the (1)(c) level.^[1] Critically, the Criminal Code itself contains no numbers — every drug threshold is "prescribed by regulation," which we set out below.

The combination offence — s. 320.14(1)(d)

Finally, section 320.14(1)(d) is a combination offence: having, within two hours of driving, both a blood alcohol concentration and a blood drug concentration at or above the levels "prescribed by regulation for instances where alcohol and that drug are combined."^[1] This reflects the reality that alcohol and cannabis together are more impairing than either alone.

The "within two hours" framing

Each per-se offence is defined by what is in your blood "within two hours after ceasing to operate a conveyance," not at the exact moment of driving.^[1] The Code provides narrow exceptions where a driver consumed the substance after driving and had no reasonable expectation of being tested, but these are technical and limited. The two-hour framing is deliberate, and it shapes both the science and the defence in every per-se case.

The per-se THC blood limits — what the regulations actually say

The numeric limits are set out in the Blood Drug Concentration Regulations (SOR/2018-148), made under the Criminal Code. These are the exact figures, tied to the exact offences they serve. Because so much online commentary blurs them together, it is worth being precise.^[2]

A few points that matter in practice:

• The 2 ng / 5 ng THC split creates two different offences. A reading at or over 2 ng but under 5 ng is the summary-conviction offence under s. 320.14(4); 5 ng or more is the more serious hybrid offence under s. 320.14(1)(c).^[2]
• The combination limit is much lower. Only 2.5 ng of THC, paired with a blood alcohol concentration of 50 mg per 100 mL (well below the 80 mg "over 80" line), is enough for the hybrid combination offence under s. 320.14(1)(d).^[2]
• For eight other drugs, "any detectable level" is the limit. For cocaine, methamphetamine and the others listed, the presence of the drug at all is enough for the per-se offence — there is no tolerance band.^[2]
• Blood is required to prove the per-se offences. The government's own guidance confirms that a blood sample is needed to establish a blood-drug-concentration offence.^[3]

Medical cannabis is not a defence to these offences

The Department of Justice has been explicit that the law "applies to all drivers, including those with a medical authorization for cannabis," and that there is no medical exemption — consistent with the long-standing rule that drivers impaired by prescription drugs have never been exempt.^[3] If you hold a medical cannabis authorization and are charged, that fact does not make the charge go away, but it can be an important part of the broader context your lawyer manages.

Why the science linking THC to impairment is contested

This is the single most important thing to understand about a cannabis DUI, and it is not a defence-lawyer talking point — it comes straight from the government that wrote the law. With alcohol, decades of research produced a reasonably predictable relationship between blood concentration and impairment, which is why the 80 mg line has held up. THC behaves completely differently.

The Department of Justice acknowledges that "unlike alcohol, the existing scientific evidence does not yet provide general guidance to drivers about how much cannabis can be consumed before it is unsafe to drive or how long a driver should wait to drive after consuming cannabis."^[3] In its backgrounder to the legislation, the government explained that the summary-conviction 2 ng level was chosen as "a precautionary approach," while the 5 ng level "is more closely linked with impairment as it can be associated with recent use."^[4] In other words, the per-se limits are policy thresholds informed by science — not proof that a person at 5 ng was actually impaired.

There is a pharmacological reason for this. When cannabis is smoked, blood-THC concentration spikes quickly and then falls rapidly as THC redistributes into fatty tissue — often declining even as subjective and functional effects persist or lag. The result is that a blood reading taken up to two hours after driving may bear little relationship to how the drug was affecting the person behind the wheel. For regular users, THC can also linger. None of this makes cannabis safe to combine with driving; the point is narrower and legally powerful: a THC number, standing alone, is a weak proxy for impairment, and that gap is something a skilled defence lawyer can put squarely in front of the court.

How police investigate a drug-DUI: SFST, oral fluid, and the DRE

Drug-impaired driving investigations move through a sequence of escalating tools, each governed by specific Criminal Code provisions and each with its own vulnerabilities. Understanding the sequence is how a defence gets built.

Roadside testing — s. 320.27

Where an officer has "reasonable grounds to suspect" that a driver has a drug in their body and has operated a vehicle within the preceding three hours, section 320.27(1) lets the officer demand that the driver "immediately perform the physical coordination tests prescribed by regulation" — the Standardized Field Sobriety Test (SFST) — and/or "immediately provide the samples of a bodily substance … by means of approved drug screening equipment," which is the roadside oral-fluid drug screener.^[5] The government notes that a positive oral-fluid result "is strongly suggestive of recent cannabis and recent cocaine use," but on its own it is a screening tool — it helps build grounds; it is not proof of an offence.^[3] The reasonable-suspicion threshold, and whether the SFST was administered correctly, are common battlegrounds.

The Drug Recognition Expert evaluation — s. 320.28

If the officer forms "reasonable grounds to believe" a drug offence has occurred, section 320.28(2) authorizes a demand that the driver "submit … to an evaluation conducted by an evaluating officer to determine whether the person's ability to operate a conveyance is impaired by a drug."^[6] This is the Drug Recognition Expert (DRE) evaluation — a structured, multi-step examination conducted at the station by a specially trained officer. On completing it, if the evaluating officer has reasonable grounds to believe a listed type of drug is impairing the driver, section 320.28(4) allows a further demand for a sample of oral fluid, urine, or blood.^[6] The government describes the process as combining SFST at the roadside with a DRE evaluation at the station that "can include a bodily fluid sample."^[3]

The DRE evaluation is a twelve-step protocol, and its reliability depends entirely on whether every step was performed correctly by a properly qualified evaluator. That dependence is exactly why it is so often challenged, as discussed below. (Note that the Criminal Code itself uses the term "evaluating officer"; "Drug Recognition Expert" and "DRE" are the terms used in policing and in the government's own public materials for the same role.)^[6]

Mandatory alcohol screening can start a drug case

Since 2018, section 320.27(2) permits an officer who already has an approved screening device to demand a breath sample from any lawfully stopped driver, without individualized suspicion.^[5] Although this "mandatory alcohol screening" targets alcohol, a routine stop can quickly evolve into a drug investigation once an officer begins forming suspicions — which is why the lawfulness of the initial stop and detention is always worth scrutinizing.

Penalties for drug-impaired driving in Ontario

The penalties are set by section 320.19 of the Criminal Code, and — importantly — the hybrid drug offences carry the same mandatory minimums as alcohol-impaired driving.^[7] These figures are the statutory framework; the immediate roadside consequences under Ontario law (below) often bite first.

A few points that matter in practice:

• Even a first offence carries a mandatory $1,000 minimum fine for the hybrid drug offences, plus a mandatory driving prohibition — there is no discretion to go below the minimum once there is a conviction.^[7]
• The high-alcohol escalating fines do not apply to drugs. The steeper minimum fines of $1,500 and $2,000 in section 320.19(3) are tied specifically to high blood alcohol concentrations under s. 320.14(1)(b), not to drug offences.^[7]
• The "low" THC offence is comparatively minor but still a federal offence. A conviction under s. 320.14(4) is capped at a $1,000 fine, but it is still a finding under the Criminal Code with real collateral consequences.^[7]

Ontario's immediate roadside and licence consequences

Long before any trial, a drug-impaired driving allegation triggers provincial consequences under Ontario law. Drivers commonly face an immediate roadside driver's licence suspension and vehicle impoundment, followed by a 90-day Administrative Driver's Licence Suspension, along with reinstatement fees and, on conviction, an ignition-interlock requirement and mandatory remedial programming. These administrative penalties operate independently of the criminal case, which is one more reason to get advice immediately rather than waiting for a court date.

The consequences of a drug-DUI beyond the sentence

Clients are usually most worried about jail and their licence, but for many people the more lasting harms lie elsewhere. A conviction for drug-impaired driving can affect:

• Your driver's licence and livelihood. A licence suspension can be devastating for anyone who drives for work, and a criminal driving record can end careers that require a clean abstract or a commercial licence.
• Immigration status. This is critical for non-citizens. Because the hybrid drug-impaired offences are punishable by a maximum of 10 years, they can be treated as serious criminality under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, which can jeopardize a permanent resident's status or a foreign national's ability to remain in Canada. If you are not a Canadian citizen, tell your lawyer immediately — avoiding a conviction may matter far more than the sentence itself. See our page on criminal charges and immigration consequences.
• Travel, especially to the United States. U.S. border officers treat impaired-driving and controlled-substance histories seriously, and a record can complicate or bar entry.
• Insurance. An impaired-driving conviction typically causes insurance premiums to rise sharply, and can lead to non-renewal.
• Employment, licensing, and reputation. A criminal record shows up on background checks and can affect current jobs, professional standing, and volunteer roles.

These downstream effects are exactly why it is worth fighting a charge that can feel, in the moment, like a bad night that will blow over. The gap between a withdrawal and a registered conviction can shape a person's life for years.

The drug-DUI court process in Toronto, step by step

Most drug-impaired driving files move through the same stages in the Ontario Court of Justice, and each stage is a place where a defence can be built.

1. The stop, the tests, and the arrest

Nearly every drug-DUI case begins with a traffic stop, followed by roadside tests and, often, a station-based DRE evaluation. How the stop was justified, whether the demands met the correct legal threshold, and whether each test was performed properly are frequently the whole case. At the point of arrest or detention, your right to counsel under section 10(b) of the Charter is engaged: you must be advised of your right to a lawyer and given a genuine opportunity to speak with one before the investigation proceeds.

2. Release or bail

For a straightforward first drug-impaired charge, most people are released by police on an appearance notice or an undertaking, sometimes with conditions. More serious files — a collision, injuries, a prior record, or related charges — may require a bail hearing, where arriving with a workable release plan and sureties can be decisive.

3. Disclosure

Your lawyer obtains disclosure — the Crown's evidence. The Crown's constitutional duty to disclose all relevant material flows from the Supreme Court's decision in R. v. Stinchcombe (1991).^[8] In a drug-DUI case, disclosure typically includes the officers' notes and grounds, the SFST and oral-fluid screening records, the full DRE evaluation documentation and the evaluator's qualifications and certification, the toxicology certificate for any blood sample, continuity records, and any video. A meticulous review of this material is where most winning defences begin.

4. Crown pre-trial and resolution discussions

Most cases involve a Crown pre-trial, where your lawyer tests the strength of the case and explores whether it can be withdrawn or resolved on favourable terms. Because drug-DUI prosecutions rest on technical procedures and contested science, a well-prepared file is often resolved at this stage — long before any trial — when the weaknesses are laid out clearly.

5. Charter applications and trial

If the case does not resolve and there are viable issues, it proceeds to trial — frequently built around a Charter application to exclude evidence, or a direct challenge to the reliability of the DRE evaluation or the toxicology. From first appearance to conclusion, a contested drug-DUI case commonly takes several months.

How Kazandji Law defends drug-impaired driving charges

Drug-DUI cases are won on detail, and the right strategy depends entirely on the disclosure in your specific file. The issues our lawyers most often raise include:

• No lawful basis for the stop or the demand. Roadside SFST and oral-fluid demands require "reasonable grounds to suspect" a drug in the body; the DRE demand requires "reasonable grounds to believe" an offence occurred. Where the officer's grounds are thin, boilerplate, or built on innocuous observations, the demands — and everything that flowed from them — are vulnerable.^[5]
• Flaws in the DRE evaluation. The evaluation is only as reliable as the officer's qualifications and adherence to the protocol. We scrutinize the evaluator's training and certification, whether every step was performed and recorded correctly, and whether the stated conclusion is actually supported by the documented observations.^[6]
• Attacking the toxicology and the THC-impairment gap. For per-se offences, we examine the blood draw, continuity, and analysis, and — where impairment is alleged — we press the government's own concession that a THC concentration does not reliably establish impairment.^[3]
• Arbitrary detention (Charter s. 9). If the stop was arbitrary or used as a pretext to investigate without grounds, the evidence that followed is open to challenge.
• Denial of the right to counsel (Charter s. 10(b)). Were you promptly advised of your right to a lawyer and given a real, private opportunity to exercise it before the DRE evaluation and sampling?
• Exclusion of evidence (Charter s. 24(2)). Where a Charter breach is established, the court applies the three-part test from R. v. Grant (2009): the seriousness of the state's Charter-infringing conduct, the impact of the breach on the accused's protected interests, and society's interest in a trial on the merits. In impaired-driving cases, a serious breach can lead a court to exclude the sample or the evaluation — which frequently ends the prosecution.^[9]
• Challenging "impairment" itself. For a s. 320.14(1)(a) charge, we test whether the observed driving and conduct truly prove impairment of the ability to drive, rather than nervousness, fatigue, a medical condition, or an innocent explanation.

These are issues that may be available — not guarantees. No responsible lawyer promises a result before reviewing the disclosure. What we promise is a rigorous, honest assessment and a defence built around the specific facts and evidence in your case.

Common myths about drug-impaired driving charges

"Cannabis is legal, so a cannabis DUI can't be that serious." Not true. The hybrid drug offences carry the same mandatory minimums as alcohol-impaired driving, up to a 10-year maximum on indictment, and the same immigration and travel consequences.

"They measured my THC, so I'm guilty." A number is not proof of impairment, and for the per-se offences the sample, its handling, and the grounds for demanding it can all be challenged. The government itself concedes THC concentration is a poor proxy for impairment.

"I have a medical cannabis authorization, so the law doesn't apply to me." It does. The Department of Justice has confirmed there is no medical exemption from the drug-impaired driving offences.

"The DRE officer is an expert, so their opinion is the last word." No. The evaluation is a structured protocol; if the steps were not followed or the officer was not properly qualified, the opinion can be undermined or excluded.

"If I just explain that I smoked hours ago, they'll drop it." Explaining rarely helps and often supplies evidence the Crown was missing. You have the right to silence — use it, and speak to a lawyer first.

"There's no point fighting — the roadside suspension already happened." The administrative licence suspension is separate from the criminal charge. Fighting the criminal case is often what protects your record, your immigration status, and your ability to drive long-term.

What to do if you have been charged with drug-impaired driving

1. Say as little as possible. Be polite, provide your licence and documents if required, but exercise your right to remain silent about drug use. Do not try to talk your way out of it.
2. Exercise your right to counsel. Ask to speak with a lawyer as soon as you are detained or arrested, and before any DRE evaluation or sampling.
3. Write down everything you remember while it is fresh — the reason given for the stop, what was said, which tests were administered and how, the timeline, and who was present.
4. Preserve helpful evidence. Keep all paperwork from the arrest, the roadside suspension, and any impoundment, and save relevant records. Do not delete anything.
5. Do not post about the case online and do not discuss the details in writing with friends.
6. If you are not a Canadian citizen, tell your lawyer immediately — it can change the entire strategy.

Why choose Kazandji Law for your drug-DUI defence

Kazandji Law is a Toronto criminal and family law firm built on a proactive, no-nonsense approach with a genuine personal touch. Drug-impaired driving cases reward preparation — a working command of the section 320.14 regime, a critical eye for DRE protocol and toxicology, and the judgment to know when to press a Charter application and when to steer a file toward withdrawal. Our team brings that preparation to every impaired-driving file, whether it is a first-time cannabis DUI or a serious matter involving a collision.

We appear in the Ontario Court of Justice and Superior Court locations across the Greater Toronto Area — including the criminal court at 10 Armoury Street in downtown Toronto — and we defend impaired-driving charges wherever they arise: downtown Toronto, North York, Scarborough, Etobicoke, Thornhill, Vaughan, Markham, Oakville, and beyond. Our Toronto office is located at 180 John St., Unit 320. You can meet our team, review our case results, and explore our full range of driving-offence services — from impaired driving and over 80 to refusing a breath sample. If your case also involves cannabis or another controlled substance, our drug possession lawyers and broader drug offence team work alongside our driving-offence practice.

Frequently asked questions

Is it illegal to drive after using cannabis in Ontario?

It can be. It is an offence to drive while your ability is impaired to any degree by cannabis (Criminal Code s. 320.14(1)(a)), and it is a separate "per se" offence to have 2 ng or more of THC per millilitre of blood within two hours of driving. There is no safe "wait time" the government can give, because THC affects people differently — so any recent cannabis use before driving carries legal risk.

What are the THC limits for driving in Canada?

For THC, the prescribed blood limits are 2 ng per mL (the summary-conviction offence, for 2 ng up to under 5 ng), 5 ng per mL or more (the more serious hybrid offence), and — in combination with alcohol — 2.5 ng of THC per mL together with 50 mg of alcohol per 100 mL of blood. These are set out in the Blood Drug Concentration Regulations.

Can I be charged even if my driving was fine?

Yes. The per-se offences under s. 320.14(1)(c) and (4) do not require proof of impaired driving at all — only a prohibited blood-drug concentration within two hours of driving. That is why the blood analysis, and the grounds for demanding it, are so central to the defence.

Does a high THC reading prove I was impaired?

No. The Department of Justice acknowledges that, unlike alcohol, the science does not establish a clear relationship between THC concentration and impairment. A per-se reading proves the concentration, not that you were actually impaired — which is a meaningful distinction a defence lawyer can use.

What is a Drug Recognition Expert (DRE) evaluation?

It is a structured, multi-step evaluation conducted at the police station by a specially trained officer (called an "evaluating officer" in the Criminal Code) to assess whether a driver is impaired by a drug. It is authorized by s. 320.28, and if it produces reasonable grounds the officer can then demand a sample of oral fluid, urine, or blood. Because it depends on strict protocol and proper qualifications, it is frequently challenged.

Can police make me give an oral-fluid sample at the roadside?

Yes, if they reasonably suspect there is a drug in your body and you drove within the preceding three hours (s. 320.27). A positive oral-fluid screen is a preliminary tool that helps build grounds; it is not itself proof of an offence, and blood is required to prove the per-se blood-drug offences.

What are the penalties for a cannabis DUI?

The hybrid drug offences (impairment by a drug, over the 5 ng limit, or the combination offence) carry the same mandatory minimums as alcohol-impaired driving: a $1,000 fine for a first offence, 30 days' jail for a second, and 120 days for a third, up to a maximum of 10 years on indictment (s. 320.19(1)). The lower-level THC offence (2–5 ng) under s. 320.14(4) is summary-only, with a maximum $1,000 fine (s. 320.19(2)). Ontario also imposes immediate licence suspension and other administrative penalties.

Does having a medical cannabis authorization protect me?

No. The government has confirmed the drug-impaired driving offences apply to everyone, including medical cannabis patients, and there is no medical exemption — just as there has never been an exemption for drivers impaired by prescription drugs.

What happens to my licence right away?

A drug-impaired driving allegation generally triggers an immediate roadside suspension and possible vehicle impoundment, followed by a 90-day Administrative Driver's Licence Suspension under Ontario law. These administrative consequences are separate from the criminal charge and take effect before any trial, which is why getting advice quickly matters.

How does a drug-impaired driving conviction affect immigration or travel?

It can have serious consequences. Because the hybrid drug offences carry a 10-year maximum, they can be treated as serious criminality under immigration law, potentially affecting a permanent resident's status or a foreign national's ability to stay in Canada. A record can also complicate entry to the United States. If you are not a citizen, raise this with your lawyer at the very start.

Do I really need a lawyer for a drug-DUI charge?

Yes — arguably more than for many other charges. These cases turn on technical procedures (SFST, oral-fluid screening, the DRE protocol, and toxicology) and on contested science, and the best outcomes usually depend on identifying weaknesses early. A conviction puts your licence, your record, your insurance, and potentially your immigration status at risk.

How much does a drug-impaired driving lawyer cost?

Fees depend on the complexity of the case and whether it resolves early or proceeds to a contested trial. Kazandji Law offers a free initial consultation and will give you a clear picture of the process and the likely cost before you decide anything.

Sources & legal references

1. Criminal Code of Canada (R.S.C. 1985, c. C-46), s. 320.14 (operation while impaired; blood drug concentration offences; combination offence; "within two hours" framing): laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/c-46/section-320.14.html.
2. Blood Drug Concentration Regulations (SOR/2018-148), ss. 1–3 (THC 2 ng for s. 320.14(4); THC 5 ng and "any detectable level" drugs for s. 320.14(1)(c); 50 mg alcohol + 2.5 ng THC for s. 320.14(1)(d)): laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/regulations/SOR-2018-148/FullText.html.
3. Department of Justice Canada, "Frequently Asked Questions — Drug-Impaired Driving Laws" (per-se levels; blood required; no medical exemption; SFST/DRE/oral-fluid tools; THC and impairment): justice.gc.ca/eng/cj-jp/sidl-rlcfa/qa2-qr2.html.
4. Department of Justice Canada, Backgrounder to former Bill C-46, "Strengthening Drug-Impaired Driving in the Criminal Code" (rationale for the 2 ng precautionary level and the 5 ng level linked to recent use): justice.gc.ca/eng/cj-jp/sidl-rlcfa/c46b/p3.html.
5. Criminal Code, s. 320.27 (roadside physical coordination tests; approved screening device; approved drug screening equipment; mandatory alcohol screening): laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/c-46/section-320.27.html.
6. Criminal Code, s. 320.28 (demand for evaluation by an "evaluating officer"; samples of oral fluid, urine, or blood on completion of the evaluation): laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/c-46/section-320.28.html.
7. Criminal Code, s. 320.19 (punishment: mandatory minimums of $1,000 / 30 days / 120 days and 10-year indictable maximum under s. 320.19(1); $1,000 summary maximum for the s. 320.14(4) offence under s. 320.19(2); high-BAC escalating fines under s. 320.19(3) apply to alcohol): laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/c-46/section-320.19.html.
8. R. v. Stinchcombe, 1991 CanLII 45 (SCC) (Crown's duty of disclosure): canlii.org/en/ca/scc/doc/1991/1991canlii45.
9. R. v. Grant, 2009 SCC 32 (three-part test for exclusion of evidence under Charter s. 24(2)): canlii.org/en/ca/scc/doc/2009/2009scc32.

Disclaimer: This page provides general legal information about Canadian and Ontario drug-impaired driving law and is not legal advice. Laws, penalties, blood-concentration regulations, and enforcement practices change, and how they apply depends on the specific facts of your case. For advice about your situation, contact a lawyer. Contacting Kazandji Law does not create a solicitor-client relationship until a retainer is signed.