R v Illyaas Maalin

Under Sentencing Act 2020, section 327(3), the court must state in open court the number of days for which a prisoner was kept in custody awaiting extradition. Where that figure was materially misstated and cannot be corrected administratively, the Court of Appeal may extend time, grant leave and allow an appeal against sentence to correct it by declaration. The declaration enables the prison authorities to take the correct period into account when calculating the prisoner’s detention.

The applicant pleaded guilty to violent disorder and was later convicted of manslaughter. He received consecutive sentences totalling 13 years’ imprisonment. At sentence, the judge stated that 69 days spent in custody in the Netherlands awaiting extradition would count towards the sentence.

When a proposed transfer to the Netherlands was being arranged, Dutch records showed that the relevant periods of detention totalled 92 days. The transfer could not proceed unless the United Kingdom release date was corrected, and that correction required an appeal. The applicant therefore sought an extension of 834 days to renew his application for leave to appeal against sentence, limited to the remand-custody calculation.

1. The court granted the extension of time and leave to appeal, treating the hearing as the appeal. There was good reason for the delay because the error emerged only when the proposed transfer to the Netherlands exposed that the recorded custody period was wrong and could not be corrected administratively.

2. Section 327(3) of the Sentencing Act 2020 required the sentencing court to specify in open court the number of days for which the applicant had been kept in custody awaiting extradition. The number stated at sentence, 69 days, was inaccurate.

3. The Crown’s confirmation from the Dutch authorities established that the applicant had been detained from 29 May 2019 to 6 August 2019 and from 18 February 2021 to 11 March 2021. Those periods amounted to 92 days.

4. The court therefore declared, pursuant to section 327, that the applicant had spent 92 days in custody awaiting extradition. The declaration enabled section 48(3)(a) of the Prison Act 1952 to operate as a direction to the Prison Service to take that period into account when calculating the duration of detention. The appeal against sentence was allowed to that limited extent.

• Court of Appeal (Criminal Division) — granted an extension of time and leave to appeal, then allowed the appeal against sentence to declare the correct 92-day extradition-custody period: [2024] EWCA Crim 1665.

• Crown Court — the applicant pleaded guilty to violent disorder at Kingston-upon-Thames, was convicted of manslaughter at the Central Criminal Court, and received consecutive sentences totalling 13 years’ imprisonment. The sentencing judge recorded 69 days of Dutch extradition custody.