People (DPP) vs Lingurar

This case involved an appeal by the appellant, Lingurar, against the refusal to release trial transcripts and the enlargement of time to appeal his conviction and sentence.

TLDR:

• Lingurar sought access to trial transcripts to formulate grounds for appeal.
• The Court of Appeal refused the release of transcripts, citing insufficient engagement with case facts.
• The appellant argued for enlargement of time to appeal based on potential miscarriage of justice.
• The Court upheld the refusal, emphasizing the need for substantial grounds for appeal.

The appellant, Lingurar, was convicted of manslaughter and sought access to the full trial transcripts to formulate grounds for appeal. He argued that his new legal team had not received adequate notes from the previous team, and that the transcripts were necessary to identify potential grounds for appeal.

The Court of Appeal examined the appellant's request and found that he had not sufficiently engaged with the facts of the case to justify the release of the transcripts. The Court emphasized that the appellant needed to demonstrate a strong chance of success in his appeal, especially given the significant delay in filing the appeal.

The appellant contended that the interests of justice required access to the transcripts, as there was a possibility of a miscarriage of justice. He pointed to inconsistencies in the complainant's evidence and argued that these inconsistencies should have been explored in the trial.

The Court, however, noted that the inconsistencies were matters for the jury to determine and did not warrant a direction to stop the trial. The Court also highlighted that the appellant had not made a case that he was absent during the relevant periods, which was a key issue in the trial.

The Court concluded that the appellant's grounds for appeal were 'late and stale' and lacked sufficient substance. The delay in filing the appeal was not adequately explained, and the issues raised had already been addressed in the trial.

As a result, the Court dismissed the appeal, upholding the refusal to release the transcripts and the decision not to enlarge the time for appeal.