worth of cocaine and marijuana when it acquitted his brother on a charge of supplying cannabis, the Court of Appeal heard yesterday.

Jamaican lawyer Mr. Frank Phipps QC, representing Everette Wellman, who was sentenced to 12 years in Casemates Prison last October, said he had "three areas of complaint''.

The verdicts are "unreasonable'', "inconsistent considering the charges'' and the trial judge misdirected the jury by not following the law on corroboration, Mr. Phipps charged.

Everette Wellman, 30, who owns a leather goods store with his brother and co-defendant Wallace, was found guilty by a jury of importing 14.6 ounces of cocaine last March 20 and importing 14.5 pounds of cannabis and possessing it with intent to supply. The drugs had a street value of more than $500,000, jurors heard.

Twenty-eight-year-old Wallace Wellman, however, walked free after being acquitted of a single charge against him of possessing cannabis with intent to supply.

Mr. Phipps, assisted by local lawyer Mr. Ed Bailey, said the jury was wrong to acquit Wallace Wellman without also acquitting Everette Wellman.

He pointed out Everette Wellman was charged with possessing the cannabis with intent to supply "while concerned together'' with his brother Wallace.

He submitted the trial judge, Puisne Judge the Hon. Mr. Justice (Austin) Ward, should have told the jury in his final summation that if they believed the evidence of one of the brothers they must acquit them both.

Mr. Phipps further said Mr. Ward's naming of Norman Wellman -- who is not related to the brothers -- as an accomplice in the crime was "highly prejudicial'' and had "confused the jury''.

"He left the jury the impression that if Norman Wellman was an accomplice then he must have been associated with the defence,'' Mr. Phipps said, claiming the judge failed to follow the law on corroboration.

Mr. Bailey spent the rest of the day arguing the trial judge failed to direct the jury properly.

He told the three appeal judges that the trial judge "did not put the defence's case clearly in his summing up''.

He said Mr. Justice Ward should have told the jury that receipts proving Everette Wellman was in New York City the day the four televisions in which the cannabis was found were purchased, had two different dates.

The judge failed to point out the discrepancy, he said, adding Everette Wellman was not in New York City on one of the dates.

Crown counsel Mr. Brian Calhoun is expected to make his submissions this morning when the appeal continues.

The brothers were arrested at a Southampton apartment after self-employed truck driver Norman Wellman delivered four televisions loaded with cannabis to them.

Norman Wellman had been followed home from the Hamilton docks by Police, who had found the drugs in the televisions and replaced them with dummy packages.

When arrested at his apartment while "poking'' in one of the televisions, he claimed he had only been tampering with them because "something suspicious had gone down at the docks''.

He denied the cannabis was his and said Everette Wellman had paid him to pick up the sets and deliver them to the Southampton address. Police followed him to that address.