Canada Judgment

British Columbia Court of Appeal

R. v. Zietsoff

On this page

Professional case brief

Research organized from the available case record

Source document

01

Holding and result

The Court granted an extension of time and leave to appeal and allowed the appeal to the extent of setting aside the two‑year probation order because the subsequent sentence rendered that probation order unlawful, following R. v. Pollock.

Court disposition

Appeal allowed in part; two‑year probation order set aside; extension of time for leave to appeal and leave to appeal granted.

Orders

  • Extension of time for leave to appeal granted.
  • Leave to appeal granted.
  • Appeal allowed to the extent of setting aside the two‑year probation order.

02

Material facts

Parties

Regina

Respondent Counsel: M. Brundrett

John William Zietsoff

Appellant Counsel: M.S.A. Fox

03

Procedural history

  1. Posture

    Criminal — Sentence Appeal / Court of Appeal Determination on Extension of Time and Leave to Appeal

04

Questions and positions

Legal issues

Party arguments

Applicant
Appellant submitted that the two‑year probation order imposed on December 6, 2001 had become unlawful because a later sentence imposed March 13, 2003 superseded it; relied on R. v. Pollock (2005 BCCA 500) and sought extension of time and leave to appeal to set aside the probation order.
Respondent
Crown agreed that the two‑year probation order had become unlawful as a result of the subsequent sentence and did not oppose extension of time, leave to appeal, and setting aside the probation order.

05

Court’s reasoning

  1. 01

    R. v. Pollock, 2005 BCCA 500

    A probation order may be rendered unlawful by a subsequent incompatible sentence.

  2. 02

    R. v. Pollock, 2005 BCCA 500

    The Court of Appeal has jurisdiction to grant an extension of time and leave to appeal to correct unlawful sentencing orders.

06

Ratio, limits and disposition

Ratio decidendi

The Court granted an extension of time and leave to appeal and allowed the appeal to the extent of setting aside the two‑year probation order because the subsequent sentence rendered that probation order unlawful, following R. v. Pollock.

Court disposition

Appeal allowed in part; two‑year probation order set aside; extension of time for leave to appeal and leave to appeal granted.

  • Extension of time for leave to appeal granted.
  • Leave to appeal granted.
  • Appeal allowed to the extent of setting aside the two‑year probation order.

Source and reliance status

British Columbia Court of Appeal · 19 November 2009

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.

Source document

British Columbia Court of Appeal

Judgment· 19 November 2009

2009 BCCA 532

2009 BCCA 532 R. v. Zietsoff

COURT OF APPEAL FOR BRITISH COLUMBIA Citation: R. v. Zietsoff, 2009 BCCA 532 Date: 20091119 Docket: CA036794; CA036795 Between: Regina Respondent And John William Zietsoff Appellant Before: The Honourable Madam Justice Prowse The Honourable Madam Justice Newbury The Honourable Mr. Justice Lowry On appeal from: Provincial Court of British Columbia, December 5, 2001 (R. v. Zietsoff, Vancouver Reg. 127353-1-D, 127388-1, 127389-D, 128032-1-HT) Oral Reasons for Judgment Counsel for the Appellant: M.S.A. Fox Counsel for the (Crown) Respondent: M. Brundrett Place and Date of Hearing: Vancouver, British Columbia November 19, 2009 Place and Date of Judgment: Vancouver, British Columbia November 19, 2009 [1] PROWSE J.A.: This is a sentence appeal in which counsel agree that a two year probation order imposed on Mr. Zietsoff by the Honourable Judge Arnold on December 6, 2001 has become unlawful as a result of a subsequent sentence imposed on Mr. Zietsoff by the Honourable Judge Sinclair on March 13, 2003. [2] The relevant authority relied on by counsel is R. v. Pollock, 2005 BCCA 500. In the result, I would grant Mr. Zietsoff's application for an extension of time for leave to appeal the sentence of December 6, 2001. I would grant leave to appeal and I would allow the appeal, but only to the extent of setting aside the two year probation order. [3] NEWBURY J.A.: I agree. [4] LOWRY J.A.: I agree. [5] PROWSE J.A.: So ordered. "The Honourable Madam Justice Prowse"

Source wording is retained. Consult the source document for its original formatting and pagination.

Authorities

Authorities used by the court

Cases, legislation, regulations, and constitutional provisions identified in the available record.

R. v. Pollock, 2005 BCCA 500

Case cited

R. v. Zietsoff, 2009 BCCA 532

Case cited

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.

About this LexChat collection

This page organizes the available case record for research. Verify quotations, current status, and subsequent treatment against the source document. Corrections can be reported to hello@esheria.ai.

Legal information, not legal advice. Research summaries do not replace the judgment.