The appellant appeals her conviction n Provincial Court on a charge on having the care or control of a moto vehicle while having a blood alcohol content exceeding 0.08. The issue on this appeal is whether the certificate of analysis of samples of the appellants breath tendered and relied upon by the Crown was properly admissible on the trial. The appellantsays it should not have been found admissible and that as there was no other evidnce to support the charge the appeal shoul succeed and the conviction should be quashed.

In suggesting that the 2 officers used different ways to describe what "appearently" was the same thing, in my view, raises a reasonable doubt whether the alcohol standard was indeed correctly indentified in the certificate of analysis