R v Max Perry Manus Prior
[2023] EWCA Crim 1651
R v Michael Vanstone
7 June 2023
[2023] EWCA Crim 774
Court of Appeal
A man was convicted of stabbing his stepfather. He tried to appeal, saying his lawyer was bad and he had mental health problems. The court said his lawyer was fine, his mental health wasn't a big problem, and there wasn't enough new evidence to change the guilty verdict. So, he's still guilty.
Key Facts
- •Michael Vanstone was convicted of wounding with intent to cause grievous bodily harm on April 16, 2019.
- •He was sentenced to an extended sentence of fourteen-and-a-half years (eleven-and-a-half years' imprisonment and a three-year extended licence period).
- •The incident involved stabbing his stepfather six times.
- •Vanstone claimed self-defense.
- •His mother was present in another room and her statement was read at trial.
- •Vanstone applied for an extension of time to appeal, citing inadequate legal representation, mental health difficulties, and the absence of his mother's live testimony.
- •A disputed unsigned statement purportedly from his mother was submitted as potential new evidence.
- •His mother provided a signed statement to the police denying the unsigned statement was hers.
Legal Principles
Extension of time to appeal requires justification in the interests of justice.
Court of Appeal decision
The court considers the credibility of new evidence and its potential to provide grounds for appeal.
Court of Appeal decision
Outcomes
Application for extension of time to appeal refused.
No proper basis for extending time; the applicant was represented at trial and sentencing, received negative appeal advice, and his difficulties did not prevent timely application. The grounds of appeal lacked merit.
Leave to appeal refused.
Grounds of appeal lacked substance; representation was deemed adequate; fitness to stand trial was not a significant issue; and the mother's potential additional evidence was minimal.
Application to adduce new evidence refused.
The new statement was unsigned, and the mother's potential testimony lacked significant bearing on the case given her absence from the scene.