R v Dean Gary Yates
The applicant's guilty plea was unequivocal, entered after full legal advice and opportunity to withdraw, and the evidence against him was compelling. The conviction for stalking was not unsafe, and the application for extension of time and leave to appeal was refused.
- Parties
- Prosecution: Rex; Applicant: Dean Gary Yates
- Jurisdiction
- England and Wales
- Judgment Date
- 16 March 2026
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Appeal / Application for Extension of Time and Leave to Appeal Against Conviction
- Outcome
- application refused
- Legal Topics
- Stalking, Appeal Procedure, Reporting Restrictions, Guilty Plea, Evidence Admissibility
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Rex
Prosecution
Dean Gary Yates
Applicant
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Application for Extension of Time and Leave to Appeal Against Conviction
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the applicant's guilty plea was unequivocal and properly advised
- 2 Whether the conviction for stalking was unsafe due to alleged false evidence
- 3 Whether reporting restrictions should continue after the complainant turned 18
Ratio Decidendi
The applicant's guilty plea was unequivocal, entered after full legal advice and opportunity to withdraw, and the evidence against him was compelling. The conviction for stalking was not unsafe, and the application for extension of time and leave to appeal was refused.
Court Disposition
application refused
Orders
- Application for extension of time of 48 days to renew application for extension of time of 203 days for leave to appeal against conviction is refused.
- Reporting restrictions imposed under section 45 of the Youth Justice and Criminal Evidence Act 1999 are dispensed with as the complainant is now 18.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment