The appellant was convicted by a jury of importing cocaine and sentenced to six years' imprisonment.
He appealed the conviction, arguing the trial judge erred in refusing to declare a mistrial after jurors observed him in the courthouse lobby.
He also appealed the sentence, arguing it violated the parity principle because two co-accused received conditional sentences.
The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, finding no error in the trial judge's handling of the mistrial application and concluding the sentence was appropriate given the appellant's major role in the smuggling enterprise compared to his co-accused.
