5.  The applicant was born in 1963. He is currently serving a prison sentence. 6.  The applicant was charged with multiple counts of fraud and unlawful possession of a firearm. The trial took place before the Grodzisk Wielkopolski District Court. The applicant, represented by a legal-aid lawyer, was present during the trial. On 19 May 2006 the court convicted the applicant of multiple counts of fraud, acquitted him of the charge of unlawful possession of a firearm and sentenced him to two years’ imprisonment. 7.  The applicant’s legal‑aid lawyer, who had represented him during the proceedings, filed an appeal against this judgment with the Poznań Court of Appeal. He maintained, in particular, that the first‑instance court had committed errors when applying the relevant provisions of substantive law; that the court had erred in refusing to admit a further expert opinion in evidence; that the presumption of innocence had thereby been breached as the court had refused to admit this evidence because the applicant had in the past been convicted in different criminal proceedings; and that the court had wrongly established the relevant facts of the case which had led it to make a wrong decision. 8.  By a letter dated 2 July 2006 the applicant lodged his own appeal with the court. He argued, inter alia, that the first‑instance court had committed errors in the assessment of the evidence, that the establishment of the facts had been erroneous and that the court’s reasoning, leading to the finding of guilt, was arbitrary. He argued that the principle of the presumption of innocence had thereby been breached. The prosecuting authorities also appealed against the judgment. 9.  By a letter of 10 October 2006 the applicant, who was in detention at that time, requested leave to be brought from prison to the hearing before the Poznań Court of Appeal. His request read:
“On the basis of Article 451 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, I hereby request to be brought to a hearing to be held on 22 November 2006 before the court of appeal during the appeal proceedings against the judgment of the Grodzisk Wielkopolski District Court.” 10.  By a decision of 25 October 2006 the court refused leave. The decision read as follows:
“Under Article 451 of the Code of Criminal Procedure an appellate court shall order that a detained accused be brought to the hearing, unless it decides that the presence of a lawyer is sufficient.
The Regional Court is of the view that the [applicant’s] request is very brief and vague and that its author has limited himself to saying that he would like to attend the hearing, failing to specify reasons why his presence was necessary or required.
The [applicant] is represented by a legal-aid lawyer, whose presence at the appeal hearing is obligatory. In those circumstances his right to an effective defence will be fully secured.” 11.  On 22 November 2006 the Court of Appeal held a hearing. The applicant’s lawyer was present. In his oral pleadings the lawyer reiterated the arguments advanced in his appeal.
The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeals against the first‑instance judgment. The court examined the grounds for the appeals adduced by the applicant’s lawyer and by the applicant himself. It was of the view that the lower court had thoroughly assessed the evidence and had carefully considered the applicant’s guilt. Its conclusions were logical, thorough and meticulously explained in the light of the voluminous evidence obtained in the case. 12.  By a letter of the same date the applicant’s legal-aid lawyer informed him that he had attended the hearing and that the court had dismissed the appeals lodged by the prosecution and by the applicant. He further informed the applicant that he had requested the court to prepare written grounds for the judgment, but that under no circumstances would he prepare a cassation appeal against the judgment. 13.  That judgment, together with its written grounds, was served on the applicant’s lawyer on 2 January 2007. Subsequently, the applicant requested to be granted legal aid for the purposes of cassation proceedings and his request was granted. Advocate K.J. was assigned to represent the applicant. She informed the court, by a letter of 24 January 2006, that she saw no grounds on which to prepare a cassation appeal. She was, inter alia, of the view that the applicant’s legal-aid lawyer had attended the hearing before the appellate court and had actively conducted the applicant’s defence. She further emphasised that the applicant’s request to attend the hearing had been very brief. 14.  By a letter of 26 January 2007 the court notified the applicant of the lawyer’s refusal to act on his behalf. It also informed the applicant that the thirty‑day time‑limit for the lodging of a cassation appeal started to run from the date on which that letter was served on the applicant.