The appellant appealed his conviction and sentence, arguing that his trial counsel provided inadequate representation due to a conflict of interest and by entering an agreed statement of facts.
The Court of Appeal dismissed the conviction appeal, finding no prejudice, conflict, or inadequate representation, and noting that the agreed statement of facts was a valid strategic decision to protect the appellant from cross-examination.
The court also dismissed the sentence appeal, finding no error in the trial judge's rejection of a conditional sentence.
