The appellant abandoned his conviction appeal but appealed his designation as a dangerous offender.
He argued the court should have relied on an expert opinion that expressed reservations about the designation.
The Court of Appeal found no basis to interfere with the sentencing judge's decision, noting that trial counsel had conceded the designation's appropriateness and no fresh evidence of ineffective assistance was presented.
The court affirmed the sentencing judge's discretion to accept the opinion of another expert who found the appellant met the dangerous offender criteria.
Leave to appeal sentence was granted, but the appeal was dismissed.
