An Ontario Court of Justice is denying Sukhvinder Rai, the man on trial for crashing his vehicle into the Skyway bridge, his application to have an important piece of evidence removed from the case against him.

On Wednesday morning, defence attorney David Locke launched a charter argument alleging Rai's charter rights were breached when he was detained in the back of a police car for hours following the crash on the Burlington Skyway on July 31, 2014.

While detained, an officer noticed the scent of alcohol on his breath. It was this bit of evidence — the smell of alcohol on Rai — that Locke worked hard to have thrown out.

Rai, 36, faces a charge of dangerous driving and four counts of mischief endangering life in connection with a dump truck with a raised box crashing into the superstructure of the Skyway bridge. It caused $1.2 million in damage.

On Wednesday, Locke went over the timeline of the case, focusing on the testimonies given by OPP officers Const. Andrew Halliday and Det. Bruce Powell.

Although Rai wasn't handcuffed and he was allowed to use his cell phone, he was still placed in the back of a police cruiser and wasn't able to leave, Locke said.

'This is a serious breach'

The crash occurred at 3:35 p.m. and Rai was placed in the back of the police cruiser shortly after 4 p.m., the court heard. It wasn't until around after 7 p.m. that Halliday detected an odour of alcohol coming from Rai.

It was an unlawful detention, plain and simple. - David Locke , defence attorney

Previous witness testimony described the scene at the bridge as chaotic and potentially dangerous. When officers arrived a little before 4 p.m., they were concerned the bridge was in danger of collapsing from the damage.

Locke said despite the chaotic scene, there was no excuse for officers to keep Rai detained without reading him his rights or telling him why he was being held. Earlier in the trial, the court heard Powell admit this was a mistake.

"This is a serious breach," Locke said, referencing section 10 (a) of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. This section says everyone who is being detained needs to be told why they are being detained.

"It was an unlawful detention, plain and simple."

Police conduct explained by the circumstances

Crown prosecutor Todd Norman argued against this appeal, agreeing that Rai was held for a time in the back of the cruiser, but with good reason.

He said soon after the crash first happened, Rai was kept in the back of the cruiser for safety reasons.

As the day progressed, Rai was held because he needed to be interviewed by police in connection to possible criminal charges.

The conduct of the police in this phase of the investigation is explained by circumstances. - Todd Norman, Crown prosecutor

Rai was going to be held at the scene just like other drivers on the bridge directly involved in the collision, Norman said. Because he could no longer wait in his own vehicle like others, he was held in a police car.

Officers should have read him his rights as soon as they decided Rai was to be a suspect in a criminal investigation, Norman said, but it was understandable why they didn't.

"The conduct of the police in this phase of the investigation is explained by circumstances," he said, alluding to the chaotic situation on the bridge.

This bottle was found in the truck that crashed into the superstructure of the Skyway bridge on July 31, 2014. Tests results presented in court revealed the liquid in the bottle was a "standard spirit" made up of 42 per cent alcohol. (Ontario Provincial Police) "This is not a purposeful breaching of his rights by not telling him why he's there and that he has a right to counsel. It's flowing from circumstances."

Norman said the evidence regarding the smell of alcohol on Rai's breath was "powerful and important" in the Crown's case toward convicting Rai on the dangerous driving charge.

Conduct of the officers was 'amazingly good'

Justice Fred Campling agreed that Rai's charter rights were breached while he was held in the police car, but even so, the officers were dealing with a unique set of circumstances.

"In my view, the overall conduct of the officers was amazingly good," Campling said.

Basing his judgment on a previous Supreme Court ruling with a similar set of circumstances, he ruled the detainment was not arbitrary or unlawful, and the evidence against him should remain.

The smell of alcohol on your breath "is important evidence against you, particularly coupled with the finding of a liquid in your truck that was 42 per cent ethyl alcohol."

On Tuesday, the court heard the results came back from testing a bottle of liquid found in the truck. Norman said the liquid was found to be a "standard spirit," like a whiskey, containing 42 per cent alcohol.

The trial will continue on Monday, with Campling expected to make a decision sometime next week.