Open Alcohol (Public Place)

R. v. Trela, 2009 ONCJ 167 (CanLII)

[47] The offences before the Court are created by subsection 32(1) of the Liquor Licence Act. In order to sustain a conviction against the defendant on both charges, the prosecution must establish, beyond a reasonable doubt, that the defendant committed all of the essential elements of the actus reus of each of the offences, as those elements are defined by subsection 32(1) of the said Act.

[48] In this regard, the prosecution must prove the identification of the defendant as the individual who committed the prohibited acts in each offence. In addition, the prosecution must prove that on the date in question and at the place described in the certificates of offence, the defendant was driving a motor vehicle, whether or not it was in motion, while there was liquor contained in the vehicle. The only evidence received by the Court during this trial was the testimony of Police Constable Paul Fretz and the two bottles, purportedly containing liquor, entered as exhibit nos. one and two. (a) Identification of the Defendant

[49] In my view, the element of identification has been established through the evidence of the prosecution witness.