R v Dean Gary Yates

For an out-of-time challenge to a conviction following a guilty plea, the court may attach decisive weight to an unequivocal plea entered on a full-facts basis after legal advice, where the defendant had an opportunity to vacate it but declined. Fresh evidence available before the plea and sentence will not ordinarily justify an extension when no application was made to vacate the plea. Complaints about a pre-sentence report generally concern sentence, not conviction. A reporting restriction under section 45 of the Youth Justice and Criminal Evidence Act 1999 can operate only while the person concerned is under 18 and cannot be indefinite.

The applicant pleaded guilty at the Crown Court at Bolton to stalking involving serious alarm or distress and was sentenced to 25 months’ imprisonment. He lodged grounds of appeal against conviction 203 days out of time. Sweeting J, sitting as Single Judge, refused extensions of time and leave to appeal. The renewal application was itself 48 days late. The applicant challenged aspects of the prosecution evidence, his guilty plea and advice, and the pre-sentence report. The full court considered whether time should be extended and leave granted, and also addressed reporting restrictions after the complainant had turned 18.

Application refused. The court refused the 48-day extension required to renew the applications for a 203-day extension and leave to appeal against conviction.

1. The court agreed with and gratefully adopted Sweeting J’s analysis. The prosecution case was strong, and the applicant had entered an unequivocal guilty plea on a full-facts basis.
2. The applicant had received legal advice, understood that he could apply to vacate his plea, had time to consider that course, and ultimately decided not to apply. His later challenges to the evidence therefore did not provide a sufficient basis for extending time to challenge the conviction.
3. Evidence from Stephen Arrowsmith was available before both the guilty plea and the sentencing hearing. No application had been made to vacate the plea. The further arguments advanced by the applicant did not address, or did not advance, the pleaded grounds or the reasons for refusal. Complaints about the pre-sentence report related to sentence and did not affect the safety of the conviction.
4. Under section 45 of the Youth Justice and Criminal Evidence Act 1999, a reporting restriction may be directed only while the person concerned is under 18. Such an order cannot operate indefinitely. The restriction had been rightly imposed while the complainant was a child, but, as she had turned 18, the court dispensed with it under section 45(3).

1. Court of Appeal (Criminal Division): The court refused the application for the extension of time required to renew the applications for an extension of time and leave to appeal against conviction: [2026] EWCA Crim 306.
2. Single Judge, Court of Appeal (Criminal Division): Sweeting J refused applications for an extension of time and leave to appeal against conviction.
3. Crown Court at Bolton: The applicant pleaded guilty on 11 September 2023 and was sentenced to 25 months’ imprisonment on 27 October 2023.