The appellant appealed his convictions for possession of heroin for the purpose of trafficking and possession of the proceeds of crime.
He argued that the information to obtain (ITO) the search warrant lacked sufficient reliable evidence and that the trial judge provided inadequate reasons for conviction.
The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, finding that the ITO contained sufficient information from confidential informants and police surveillance to justify the warrant.
The Court also held that despite the trial judge's brevity and misapprehension of a defence concession, the reasons were sufficient for appellate review given the uncontroverted evidence of trafficking indicia.
