The Court refused leave to appeal against conviction, holding that the appellant's unequivocal guilty pleas entered on legal advice to avoid prolonged remand did not constitute a miscarriage of justice, even where the appellant subjectively believed he was not guilty. The Court found the appellant did not have a reasonably arguable defence to any of the charges, and even if he did, no miscarriage arose because he did not wrongly understand he had no arguable defence at the time of pleading. On sentence, the Court allowed the appeal and made spent conviction orders on all six charges, finding that the offences were at the lowest end of seriousness, the appellant was of prior good character and unlikely to reoffend, and the convictions could adversely affect his longstanding career as a dentist, notwithstanding that no formal spent conviction application had been made below.
The full text is available to signed-in members.