Court Of Appeal Refuses Appeal Against Firearm Sentence & Conviction; Man Says No Gun Was Ever Found

By Alric Lindsay

Mikkyle Brandon Leslie is serving 16 years for possession of a firearm had his applications for leave to appeal against conviction and sentence refused by the Court of Appeal today, August 28, 2026, several years after he was convicted.

Opening the hearing, the President of the Court of Appeal told the applicant it was the sixth time his case had been called on. The court’s judgment recorded the five previous occasions: November 8, 2024, May 14, 2025, September 4, 2025, November 12, 2025 and April 23, 2026. On the last of those the court had adjourned the case saying it would be heard, in its own words, “come what may”, in August 2026.

After that April hearing the applicant obtained written advice from leading counsel in England. The conclusion, as the court was informed, was that there were no viable grounds of appeal against either conviction or sentence, and that the appeal should be abandoned. The applicant rejected that advice.

He told the court he had lost three lawyers over the life of the case, that two of them had advised him he had grounds, and that he wanted someone to argue his case. “I just want someone to argue my case,” he said. The President put it to him that he would not obtain legal aid in the face of an advice saying there was no merit.

The conviction

The applicant was convicted on February 18, 2022 after a trial by judge alone, and sentenced to 16 years. The court set out the facts.

Shortly after 11pm on 1 July 1, 2021 there was an incident outside the Globe Bar in George Town. Three men were outside. Two or three armed individuals fired a number of shots in their direction. Two of the men died, one at the scene and one a little later.

The applicant was not charged in connection with the deaths. The single count he faced, and the count he was convicted of, was possession of a firearm.

The trial judge found his role established by admissions in a series of WhatsApp messages sent in the early hours. As the judge put it in his sentencing remarks, quoted by the Court of Appeal, the evidence that convicted him “came from his own hand and mouth when he was bragging to others about what he’d done”.

In those messages the applicant said he had been in a gunfight, that he had returned fire, that he had hit one or more people, and that he believed one had been taken to hospital. He said he had been shooting to kill but that his gun went “click, click” — that he had run out of ammunition. A voice recording circulating on social media captured the gunshots, and the applicant identified to another person which of the shots was his.

No firearm was ever recovered. The judge concluded on circumstantial evidence that the weapon was a 9mm semi-automatic pistol; spent cartridge cases from such a weapon were found at the scene, some thirty of them. CCTV showed the applicant running from the direction of the shooting shortly after the first emergency call.

His case at trial was that he was “bigging himself up”, repeating what others had told him, and that he had left the scene before the shooting began. The judge did not accept it, and found that he had given a lying account in the witness box.

Argument on appeal

Arguing his own case, the applicant said there was no physical evidence against him. No firearm was produced and none was found on him. He said cell site material should have been obtained, which might have placed him elsewhere. He said he had never described the weapon in the messages, that other people had been shooting that night, and that the cartridge cases could not be traced to any particular weapon.

On the cell site point the court noted that no application had been made at trial for such evidence, and that there was none.

The President told him that the points he was making had been made to the trial judge, and the judge had not accepted them. “What you are effectively asking us to do is retry a case,” he said. “That’s not our job.”

In its judgment the court said this was “the clearest possible case”. The judge had set out his findings with care and balance, was unarguably entitled to reach them, and there was “no conceivable basis for this court to interfere”. It was unsurprising, the court added, that the applicant had been advised his appeal had no merit.

The appeal against the sentence

Given the opportunity to address sentence, the applicant said 16 years was excessive and that it was the longest term anyone had received for possession of a firearm. The court said it doubted that was right, but that it made no difference either way.

The judge had identified several seriously aggravating features: a 2013 conviction for importing firearms into the Cayman Islands from the United States; that the applicant was in a public place at night with a loaded firearm which he used; and evidence of involvement in what the court called the culture of guns. Self-defence had rightly been rejected as mitigation.

The judge was “plainly entitled to pass the sentence he did”, the court held, and “could not have been criticised had he passed a higher sentence in all the circumstances”.

The applications against the sentence and conviction were both refused.

Note to readers

Leslie appeared before the Court of Appeal in person. Scott Wainwright appeared for the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions. The court comprised the President, the Rt Hon Sir John Goldring, sitting with the Hon Sir Michael Birt and the Hon Clare Montgomery KC.