Ashby (a pseudonym) v The Queen

The case of Ashby v The Queen involved an application by the defendant, using a pseudonym, for an extension of time to seek leave to appeal against his conviction and sentence. The application was heard by a single judge of the Court of Appeal. The central issues were whether the trial had miscarried due to the admission of prejudicial evidence and the alleged incompetence of the defendant's trial counsel, and whether the defendant's proposed grounds of appeal were reasonably arguable.

The court examined the trial records and found that the evidence in question, although it might have been prejudicial, did not result in a miscarriage of justice. The court also scrutinised the conduct of the defendant's trial counsel and concluded that the cross-examination of the complainant, while not exemplary, did not amount to incompetence. The proposed grounds of appeal, concerning the admissibility of certain evidence and the conduct of the trial, were deemed not reasonably arguable. The judge determined that granting an extension of time would be futile.

The court refused the application for an extension of time, finding it unnecessary and unjustifiable. In relation to the sentence, the court considered the defendant's application to set aside the judge's order regarding the reporting period under the Sex Offenders Registration Act 2004. The court accepted that the trial judge had been misled by the prosecutor, and the Crown conceded that there was no basis for the order. Consequently, the court set aside the order, substituting a reporting period under the Sex Offenders Registration Act 2009.

The final orders of the court were the refusal of the application for an extension of time and the setting aside of the order concerning the reporting period under the Sex Offenders Registration Act 2004.