R v Kirk Daniels
[2024] EWCA Crim 1008
R v Liaqat Hayat
7 December 2023
[2023] EWCA Crim 1707
Court of Appeal
Mr. Hayat tried to appeal his guilty pleas, claiming his lawyer was bad. The court looked at his lawyer's notes and saw she had done a good job. Because he waited too long to appeal (over 3 years), his appeal was rejected.
Key Facts
- •Liaqat Hayat pleaded guilty to one count of harassment and four counts of common assault in December 2019.
- •He received a 58-week prison sentence.
- •Hayat remained in immigration detention after completing his sentence, for a total of 72 weeks.
- •He applied for an extension of time (1126 days) to appeal his conviction, claiming inadequate legal advice.
- •His counsel provided detailed notes showing she was fully prepared for trial and advised him properly, including obtaining a Goodyear indication.
- •Hayat claimed his counsel was ill-prepared, rushed him into a decision, and countermanded his instructions.
- •The delay in applying for leave to appeal was attributed to continued incarceration and difficulties accessing legal help.
Legal Principles
Criminal Procedure Rule 1.1 (Overriding Objective)
Court of Appeal Criminal Division
Goodyear Indication (regarding the maximum sentence)
Court of Appeal Criminal Division
Legal Professional Privilege (waived in this case)
Court of Appeal Criminal Division
Outcomes
Application for an extension of time and leave to appeal refused.
The court found the applicant's counsel acted professionally. There were no arguable grounds for appeal, and the delay in applying was excessive and inadequately justified.