Just in case I wasn't clear earlier, when I said it can be issued simply for smell, I was thinking of S.89 (24 hour suspension). Based on the TSA legislation itself, a S.90 (30 day novice driver suspension) can only be issued after a blood or breath test shows that there is infact alcohol present in the persons blood.
Based on that, and that alone, it appears that this suspension was issued as a result of an "error in law". This means that the Cst misapplied a piece of legislation. I am not talking about some chicken-sh*t spelling error on a summons or ticket, but actually applying the law incorrectly. This is why I believe there may be grounds for an appeal.
I am using my training and experience in navagating through Federal and American Legislation and figuring out exactly what it is saying.
*This is all dependent on the OP telling us the full story and not leaving things out (ie: a refusal).
I don't want to say who I work for on the Interweb... It is not the CPS though. I am trained and authorized by my agency on how to handle Impaired Drivers (and all Federal Criminal Matters) and have the authority to lay charges under the CCC. I do not typically handle provincial or municipal legislation or by-laws.
|