This is a case study on Refuse Breath Test, traffic offences, and drug offences resulting in a fine and a “not guilty” verdict for the first offence.
What is alleged to have occured?
Our client was facing multiple charges involving both traffic and non-traffic offences. He was listening to the radio while seated on the driver’s seat of his car when the police found him and subjected him to a breath test. Our client refused.
What happened at court?
The charges he faced at the Melbourne Magistrates’ Court were:
The magistrate however ruled that there was no sufficient proof to prove that our client was “in charge” of a motor vehicle at the time of the alleged offending. Hence the police did not have the right to subject him to a breath test.
What was the result?
Ultimately, the magistrate found our client not guilty of the charge of Refuse Breath Test. A fine was imposed for the rest of the charges which our client could pay within 3 months. His licence was also cancelled and he was disqualified from driving for 18 months.
What is alleged to have occured?
Our client was facing multiple charges involving both traffic and non-traffic offences. He was listening to the radio while seated on the driver’s seat of his car when the police found him and subjected him to a breath test. Our client refused.
What happened at court?
The charges he faced at the Melbourne Magistrates’ Court were:
- Refuse Breath Test
- Drive While Suspended By Infringements
- Exceed Speed Limit
- Possess Cannabis
- Possess Heroin
The magistrate however ruled that there was no sufficient proof to prove that our client was “in charge” of a motor vehicle at the time of the alleged offending. Hence the police did not have the right to subject him to a breath test.
What was the result?
Ultimately, the magistrate found our client not guilty of the charge of Refuse Breath Test. A fine was imposed for the rest of the charges which our client could pay within 3 months. His licence was also cancelled and he was disqualified from driving for 18 months.
DISCLAIMER: This is a real case study of an actual case from our files. Details pertaining to the client have been changed to protect their privacy. The sentence imposed and the charge have not been altered. These case studies are published to demonstrate real outcomes and give an indication of possible tariffs in Court. We do not guarantee a similar case on these charges will get the same result. Please note that we post results at our discretion, therefore while many case studies are average results, others are notable for their exceptional outcomes. PUBLISHED 20/03/2020
