R. v. Lamb
- Citation
- 2005 BCCA 587
- Status
- Judgment
- Jurisdiction
- Canada
- Court
- British Columbia Court of Appeal
- Decision
- 21 November 2005
- Posture
- Criminal Sentencing Appeal / Court of Appeal Decision on Probation Order (extension of Time and Leave to Appeal Granted)
- Language
- English
More details
- Court
- British Columbia Court of Appeal
- Decision
- 21 November 2005
- Posture
- Criminal Sentencing Appeal / Court of Appeal Decision on Probation Order (extension of Time and Leave to Appeal Granted)
- Language
- English
On this page
Professional case brief
Research organized from the available case record
01
Holding and result
Because the probation order was attached to a sentence exceeding two years in violation of s.731(b) Criminal Code and s.139 Corrections and Conditional Release Act (as conceded by Crown), the order is illegal and must be quashed; the court granted an extension of time and leave to appeal and allowed the appeal.
Court disposition
Appeal allowed; probation order quashed; extension of time to 20 October 2005 granted; leave to appeal granted.
Orders
- Time to appeal extended to 20 October 2005
- Leave to appeal granted
- Probation order quashed
02
Material facts
Parties
Regina
Respondent Counsel: U. BotzJoseph James Lamb
Appellant Counsel: D. KrippAmounts and remedies
- Probation Term (years): 3
- Immediate Imprisonment Term (years): 2
- Global Sentence (years): 3
- Counts Sentenced in This Order: 5
03
Procedural history
Posture
Criminal Sentencing Appeal / Court of Appeal Decision on Probation Order (extension of Time and Leave to Appeal Granted)
04
Questions and positions
Legal issues
- 01
Whether a probation order may validly attach to a sentence exceeding two years
- 02
Whether time to appeal should be extended
- 03
Whether the probation order should be quashed
Party arguments
- Applicant
- Appellant sought to set aside the probation order as illegal because it attached to a sentence greater than two years; he delayed bringing an application for extension of time until 20 October 2005 and was released in August; service of the probation was suspended pending appeal.
- Respondent
- Crown conceded that the probation order violated s.731(b) of the Criminal Code and s.139 of the Corrections and Conditional Release Act, consented to an extension of time, leave to appeal, and that the probation order be quashed (citing R. v. Pawluk, 2005 BCCA 500).
05
Court’s reasoning
Legal principles
- 01
Criminal Code s.731(b)
A probation order cannot validly attach to a sentence in excess of two years.
- 02
Corrections and Conditional Release Act s.139
Corrections and Conditional Release Act provisions prohibit attachment of probation to sentences over statutory limits.
- 03
R. v. Pawluk, 2005 BCCA 500 and appellate practice
Appellate courts may grant extensions of time and leave to appeal where warranted and may quash illegal orders by consent.
06
Ratio, limits and disposition
Ratio decidendi
Because the probation order was attached to a sentence exceeding two years in violation of s.731(b) Criminal Code and s.139 Corrections and Conditional Release Act (as conceded by Crown), the order is illegal and must be quashed; the court granted an extension of time and leave to appeal and allowed the appeal.
Court disposition
Appeal allowed; probation order quashed; extension of time to 20 October 2005 granted; leave to appeal granted.
- Time to appeal extended to 20 October 2005
- Leave to appeal granted
- Probation order quashed
Source and reliance status
British Columbia Court of Appeal · 21 November 2005
This page organises the available record for research. Confirm quotations, current status, and subsequent treatment against the official source before relying on the case.
Judgment reading view
Judgment text
The complete available source text.
British Columbia Court of Appeal
Judgment· 21 November 2005
2005 BCCA 587 R. v. Lamb
COURT OF APPEAL FOR BRITISH COLUMBIA Citation: R. v. Lamb, 2005 BCCA 587 Date: 20051121 Docket: CA033425 Between: Regina Respondent And Joseph James Lamb Appellant Before: The Honourable Mr. Justice Hall The Honourable Mr. Justice Low The Honourable Mr. Justice Lowry Oral Reasons for Judgment D. Kripp Counsel for the Appellant U. Botz Counsel for the (Crown) Respondent Place and Date: Vancouver, British Columbia 21 November 2005 [1] LOW, J.A.: For five counts of fraud a provincial court judge sentenced the appellant to imprisonment for two years plus threes years probation. This sentencing occurred on 28 February 1997. The term of imprisonment was made concurrent with a global sentence of imprisonment for three years imposed the same date for 57 counts of fraud, forgery, personation, and property offences committed between 1987 and 1996 but was consecutive to sentences the appellant was then serving including a sentence of three months for being unlawfully at large. [2] The appellant seeks to have the probation order set aside as being illegal. He did not bring an application for extension of time to appeal until 20 October 2005. We are told by counsel that the appellant was released last August and that the serving of the probation order has been suspended pending the outcome of this appeal. [3] The Crown concedes that the probation order violates s. 731(b) of the Criminal
Code and s. 139 of the Corrections and Conditional Release Act because it attaches to a sentence of greater than two years: see R. v. Pawluk 2005 BCCA 500. [4] The Crown consents to the extension to appeal; agrees that leave to appeal should be granted; and agrees that this Court should allow the appeal and quash the probation order. [5] I would extend the time to appeal to 20 October 2005, grant leave to appeal and allow the appeal and quash the probation order. [6] HALL, J.A.: I agree [7] LOWRY, J.A.: I agree. [8] HALL, J.A.: The appeal is allowed and the probation order is quashed. "The Honourable Mr. Justice Low"
Case-aware research
Ask AI about this case
The judgment and available research above are public. New questions open in a separate private conversation grounded in this case.