R v Driss Serhir
[2024] EWCA Crim 54
R v Eiraj Zarazadeh
29 June 2023
[2023] EWCA Crim 822
Court of Appeal
A man appealed his nine-year-old rape conviction. The court found his reasons for appealing were weak and didn't change the original guilty verdict, so the appeal was rejected.
Key Facts
- •Eiraj Zarazdeh was convicted in September 2013 of rape following a retrial.
- •The complainant was 14 years old at the time of the alleged offence (December 23, 2011).
- •The applicant's defense was that he had unintentionally spooned the complainant while sleeping and that he suffered from a medical condition that made it impossible for him to have committed the rape.
- •The appeal was lodged almost nine years after the conviction.
- •The applicant raised four grounds of appeal, including fresh evidence, altered mobile phone data, criticisms of the judge's summing-up, and inadequate legal representation.
Legal Principles
Sexual Offences (Amendment) Act 1992: Protection of victim's identity.
Sexual Offences (Amendment) Act 1992
Criminal Appeal Act 1968: Considering fresh evidence in appeals.
Criminal Appeal Act 1968
Outcomes
Leave to appeal refused.
The grounds of appeal were deemed without merit. The fresh evidence was not considered credible or capable of rendering the conviction unsafe. Criticisms of the summing-up and trial process were also rejected. The claim of inadequate legal representation was found to be unsubstantiated.
Extension of time refused.
The appeal lacked merit, and there was no justification for the significant delay in lodging the appeal.