Vanstone, R. v [2023] EWCA Crim 774 (07 June 2023)
There was no proper basis for extending time to appeal as the applicant was adequately represented, assessed as fit to plead, and the absence of his mother as a witness did not prejudice the trial. The unsigned new statement would not have affected the outcome. All applications refused.
- Citation
- [2023] EWCA Crim 774
- Parties
- Prosecution: Rex; Applicant: Michael Vanstone
- Jurisdiction
- England and Wales
- Judgment Date
- 07 June 2023
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Appeal / Application for Extension of Time to Appeal, Leave to Appeal, and Leave to Adduce New Evidence
- Outcome
- applications refused
- Legal Topics
- Wounding With Intent, Appeal Procedure, Admission of New Evidence, Fitness to Plead, Adequacy of Legal Representation
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Rex
Prosecution
Michael Vanstone
Applicant
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Application for Extension of Time to Appeal, Leave to Appeal, and Leave to Adduce New Evidence
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether there is a proper basis for extending time to appeal
- 2 Whether the applicant was inadequately represented at trial
- 3 Whether the applicant was unfit to plead or required an intermediary
Ratio Decidendi
There was no proper basis for extending time to appeal as the applicant was adequately represented, assessed as fit to plead, and the absence of his mother as a witness did not prejudice the trial. The unsigned new statement would not have affected the outcome. All applications refused.
Court Disposition
applications refused
Orders
- Application for extension of time to appeal refused
- Leave to appeal refused
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