Eight-year wait for transcript slows imprisoned taxi driver’s appeal

The Court of Appeal has frowned on the inordinate eight-year wait for an appellant to get the transcript of his trial to appeal against his 15-year prison sentence.

“It is hereby declared that the rights of the appellant under Sections 16 (1) and 16 (8) of the Constitution of Jamaica to be afforded a fair hearing within a reasonable time have been breached by the excessive delay between the date the sentence was imposed and the hearing of the appeal,” the court has ruled.

The court, comprising Justice Frank Williams, Justice Nicole Simmons, and Justice Evan Brown, declared that the right of the appellant to be given a copy of the proceedings for his own use had been breached by the excessive delay.

Stephen Francis, a taxi driver, had filed an appeal shortly after his convictions in July 2014. Francis, 36, said in his affidavit that he experienced “eight years of excruciating agony as I awaited the production of the transcript”. The appellant, who has been behind bars since his conviction, said no reason was given for the egregious delay in the production of the transcript.

Senior attorney-at-law Oswest Senior-Smith, who represented Francis, has condemned the delays and is calling on the State to do better in the wake of aspirations towards a 21st-century justice system for Jamaica.

Last week Friday, the court set aside the sentence of 15 years’ imprisonment for illegal possession of firearm and substituted a sentence of six years and 10 months. Credit of one year and two months was given for the time Francis spent on remand before sentence. A reduction of two years was granted for breaches of his constitutional rights.

The sentence of 15 years’ imprisonment for robbery with aggravation was set aside and a sentence of eight years and 10 months was imposed. There was credit of one year and two months for time spent on remand before sentence. There was also a reduction of two years for breaches of his constitutional rights. The sentences are to run concurrently and are recommended as having commenced on July 25, 2014, when they were imposed.

Now, with the reduction in sentences, Francis will leave prison immediately as he has already served the time.

There have been several cases recently in which the appellate court condemned the practice of appeal cases being delayed because transcripts were not available.

Senior-Smith yesterday referred to several cases similar to that of Francis and remarked that it could be extracted from the cases that the Court of Appeal is fully prepared to act as the guardian and guarantor of the inalienable rights of the citizens.

“But further, it cannot be gainsaid that with aspirations towards a 21st-century justice system, the State must do better and provide the necessary financial resources to the court-reporting department. Alternatively, perhaps the mode of capturing the proceedings should migrate to tape and digital recordings in addition to the conventional present means.

“Justice is much too invested in and contingent on the generating of timely and accurate transcriptions for these hitches to be repeated time and again,” Senior-Smith emphasised.