Yes, you can be charged even if you were asleep and the vehicle was not moving.
Under Canadian law, the issue is not whether you were driving, but whether you had “care or control” of the vehicle while impaired. If police believe there was a realistic risk that the vehicle could be put in motion, criminal charges may follow.
Many people assume that choosing to “sleep it off” in their car is the safest legal option. In practice, that assumption is often wrong. The Canadian impaired driving law is deliberately broad and designed to prevent risk before it materializes, not just punish driving after it happens.
Canadian impaired driving offences are set out in Part VIII of the Criminal Code , including section 320.14 . These provisions extend beyond active driving.
A person may be in care or control of a vehicle if they:
Police do not need to prove that you intended to drive. The legal question is whether your situation created a risk that the vehicle could be set in motion while you were impaired.
“The law is designed to prevent danger before it happens. If there is a realistic pathway to the vehicle being driven, that can be enough for a charge.”
—
Jeff Mass
Sleeping while intoxicated may appear responsible, but certain factors increase legal risk:
From a legal standpoint, these circumstances may suggest that the person could:
Because of this, police frequently lay charges even where there was no actual driving.
The leading case is R. v. Boudreault (2012 SCC 56) , where the Supreme Court clarified how care or control must be assessed.
The Court articulated a three-part framework for establishing care or control:
Of these elements, the concept of risk is determinative. The Court clarified that the risk must be grounded in reality rather than mere speculation. While the Crown is not required to prove an intention to drive, the accused may rebut the inference of risk by presenting credible, reliable evidence that no realistic danger existed in the circumstances.
Although charges are common, convictions are not automatic.
A person may avoid liability if they can show there was no realistic risk of danger, for example:
In Boudreault , the accused avoided conviction because:
“Care or control cases often turn on very specific facts. Small details — where the keys were, what steps were taken — can make the difference between conviction and acquittal.”
—
Heather Spence
If convicted, care or control carries the same consequences as impaired driving, including:
More serious cases can lead to jail time, especially for repeat offences.
People frequently underestimate how quickly a situation can escalate. Common mistakes include:
In law, risk outweighs intention.
Care or control cases are often defensible because they depend heavily on context.
Defence strategies may focus on:
These cases are rarely straightforward and require detailed legal analysis.
Statements made at the scene, including informal or seemingly harmless remarks, may later be relied upon by the Crown as evidence of intent, care or control, or the existence of a realistic risk of danger. In many cases, these statements become a central part of the prosecution’s theory and are difficult to challenge once recorded.
Early legal advice is therefore critical. Counsel can assess the evidentiary record, scrutinize how police interpreted the circumstances, and identify whether the Crown can properly establish the required elements, particularly the presence of a realistic risk. Prompt intervention also allows for the development of a coherent defence strategy before the case's narrative becomes fixed.
If you were found asleep in your vehicle and charged with impaired driving , you are facing a criminal offence with serious long-term consequences.
The criminal defence lawyers at Mass Tsang have extensive experience defending care or control cases across Toronto and the GTA. Their approach focuses on fact-specific analysis, evidentiary challenges, and the protection of your record and future.
If you are facing charges, speak to a lawyer before taking further steps.
Yes. You can be charged if police believe you had care or control of the vehicle while impaired, even if you were asleep.
It means being in a position to operate a vehicle. You do not need to be driving to be charged.
Not always. Courts focus on whether there was a realistic risk that the vehicle could be put in motion.
The Court ruled that there must be a “realistic risk of danger,” not just a theoretical possibility.
Possibly. If you can prove there was no realistic risk of driving, charges may not result in a conviction.
It may reduce risk, but it does not automatically prevent charges. Context still matters.
Penalties are the same as impaired driving, including fines, licence suspension, and a criminal record.
Yes. Having keys within reach can be used as evidence of control over the vehicle.
You should seek legal advice before making statements, as they may be used against you.
