Adam Johnson, the disgraced former England and Sunderland footballer, must wait to discover if he is to be granted permission to challenge his conviction for sexual activity with a teenage fan.
The 29-year-old, who was jailed for six years in March after being convicted of sexual activity with a 15-year-old following a trial at Bradford crown court, is also seeking a reduction in his sentence.
Three appeal court judges on Tuesday reserved judgment after hearing his renewed application. It has previously been rejected by a single judge.
His application to appeal centres on claims the original trial judge, Jonathan Rose, misdirected the jury in his summing up.
Eleanor Laws QC, representing Johnson, also said the judge should have intervened to stop “irrelevant and emotive” cross-examination of Johnson, which undermined Johnson’s credibility.
Johnson’s trial heard that the player kissed and touched the girl sexually in his Range Rover in a secluded spot in County Durham.
The jury was told Johnson had admitted kissing the girl, but denied that he sexually touched her in an intimate area.
The appeal court heard Johnson was subjected to “emotive and highly prejudicial” questioning from the prosecution over his delay in admitting he had kissed her, and was repeatedly questioned about “where his conscience was” and the “excruciating pain” that delay had caused his victim.
The judge should have directed the jury that if there was a good reason for that delay, such as legal advice, they should ignore the fact of that delay, said Laws, and not convict the applicant on evidence of that delay and “seeing lack of remorse” in his delay in pleading.
Laws also argued the judge misdirected the jury when he made an “adverse inference direction” over what Johnson had and had not told police in interview after his arrest over what time he was expected to be at his club’s ground on the day of the offence.
Laws said the judge’s misdirection “must have had an adverse and unfair impact on the credibility of Adam Johnson in a case where credibility was a critical issue and hence the conviction is unsafe” .
At his trial, the judge said he was satisfied the girl suffered “severe psychological harm” and that Johnson took advantage of a “young teenager’s adoration of a successful celebrity”.
His conviction led Sunderland to say the club was “so very sorry” for letting down the 15-year-old fan, and to the resignation of the chief executive, Margaret Byrne, after she admitted “a serious error of judgement” in advising the board that the star could carry on playing after he was initially suspended.
Lady Justice Rafferty, Mr Justice Sweeney and judge Julian Goose QC also heard claims Johnson’s six-year sentence was “too much” .
Laws argued: “When one looks at the judge’s sentencing remarks he was clearly highly influenced by the fact that the applicant was a famous and successful footballer and in fact counted that against him.”
Kate Blackwell QC, for the crown, said: “The crown’s prosecution do not accept there was a fundamental error of fact made by the judge.” She said the judges’ remarks were consistent with evidence given by Johnson at his trial.
Judgment was reserved until a later date.
