R v Janz

The applicant sought leave to appeal his sentence 13 months out of time. The applicant had been convicted of grievous bodily harm with intent and sentenced to 10 and a half years imprisonment. The applicant, who had cerebral palsy, attributed the delay in seeking leave to appeal to his inability to act on his own behalf. The applicant also sought a reduction in sentence, arguing it was manifestly excessive compared to the sentence imposed on Schipper in R v Bird and Schipper. The applicant argued the sentencing judge had not sufficiently regarded his psychological state or the impact of his cerebral palsy.

The court examined the grounds for extending the time limit for appealing the sentence, considering the applicant's disability and its impact on his ability to act promptly. The court also assessed whether the sentence was manifestly excessive by comparing it to similar cases. The court noted the applicant's history of extravagant and untruthful storytelling, indicative of a personality disorder, but found no evidence of a psychotic disorder or mental illness. The court also considered whether the sentencing judge had appropriately accounted for the applicant's disabilities in determining the sentence.

The court found that the delay in seeking leave to appeal was not attributable to the applicant's disability in a way that warranted an extension of time. The court also held that the sentence was not manifestly excessive when compared to similar cases. The court determined that the sentencing judge had appropriately considered the applicant's psychological state and disability. Consequently, the application for an extension of time and the application for a reduction in sentence were both refused.