R v NRZ
The application for extension of time was refused because there was no good reason for the lengthy delay and the grounds of appeal, including the application to adduce fresh evidence, were devoid of merit. The non-disclosure of L's position was not material, criticisms of trial counsel were unjustified, and the requests for further disclosure were speculative.
- Parties
- Prosecution: Rex; Applicant: NRZ
- Jurisdiction
- England and Wales
- Judgment Date
- 11 October 2024
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Appeal / Renewed Application for Extension of Time to Appeal Conviction
- Outcome
- renewed application for extension of time to appeal conviction dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Sexual Offences, Appeals, Fresh Evidence, Disclosure, Ineffective Assistance of Counsel
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Rex
Prosecution
NRZ
Applicant
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Renewed Application for Extension of Time to Appeal Conviction
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the application for extension of time to appeal conviction should be granted
- 2 Whether non-disclosure of a statement from L was material to the outcome
- 3 Whether trial counsel were ineffective for not calling certain witnesses
Ratio Decidendi
The application for extension of time was refused because there was no good reason for the lengthy delay and the grounds of appeal, including the application to adduce fresh evidence, were devoid of merit. The non-disclosure of L's position was not material, criticisms of trial counsel were unjustified, and the requests for further disclosure were speculative.
Court Disposition
renewed application for extension of time to appeal conviction dismissed
Orders
- Application dismissed
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