Praniess v Police

The Full Court of the Supreme Court of South Australia heard an appeal by the appellant against an order of a single judge of that court, which had dismissed the appellant's appeals against his conviction for driving under the influence of intoxicating liquor contrary to section 47(1) of the *Road Traffic Act 1961* (SA) and a finding of guilt for exceeding the prescribed concentration of alcohol contrary to section 47B of the same Act. The prosecution had withdrawn the latter charge prior to sentencing by the magistrate. The appellant had pleaded not guilty to both counts.

The central legal issue before the court was whether the court should exercise its discretions to exclude evidence of a breath analysis reading on grounds of unfairness or public policy, given that a blood sample had been taken but was subsequently found to be unsuitable for analysis, thereby preventing the appellant from challenging the breath analysis result as permitted by the Act.

The court held that it was unnecessary to determine the question of whether the breath analysis evidence should have been excluded. This was because there was overwhelming independent evidence to prove the appellant was driving under the influence of intoxicating liquor. The observations made by police officers and a nurse, as well as video evidence taken during the breath analysis procedure, were considered compelling and sufficient to establish the charge beyond reasonable doubt, irrespective of the breath analysis reading.

Consequently, the appeal was dismissed.