The appellant appealed a committal order for extradition to the United States on a charge equivalent to conspiracy to traffic in cocaine.
He argued that the evidence only demonstrated an attempt to enter into a conspiracy and that the extradition judge improperly relied on expert evidence to find an agreement.
The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, finding that wiretap evidence and the appellant's subsequent arrest for importing cocaine supported an inference of an ongoing agreement, and that the expert evidence was properly used to interpret coded conversations.