The appellant appealed from his conviction of over 80 contending that the trial judge had erred in allowing the admission of a certificate of a qualified technician when the readings given by the appellant were givin under compulsion of statute contrary to s. 11(c) of the Charter. Secondly, it was urged that s. 237(1)(f) of C.C.C. infringed the presumption of innocence guaranteed by s. 11(d) s. 237 provided in part that the certificate consitituted evidence of the statement contained therein without proof of the signature of teh official character of the person named therein....appeal was dismissed

The Charter did not render the compulsory breath test scheme illegal nor did it render the certificate of analysis so obtained as inadmissible in any proceedings agaist the person giving it. This was the law prior to the Charter and this is continued to be the law