A businessman serving seven years behind bars for money laundering yesterday lost an appeal to get his conviction and sentence overturned.

Goodwin Davano Spencer, 42, appeared before Justices Edward Zacca, Sir Anthony Evans and Sir Robin Auld in the Court of Appeal.

The Justices heard submissions from his lawyer Shade Subair and Crown counsel Cindy Clarke yesterday but did not quash the conviction.

And they determined the seven-year sentence was "not manifestly excessive" considering the facts.

Spencer was found guilty in 2008 of 11 charges of money laundering on behalf of Trinidadian Wayne Jagoo. The charge involved nearly $160,000 believed to be the profit from drug trafficking.

A court determined that Spencer, who ran Tuff Shoes and Mega Power Car Care Products, sent Jagoo the money or helped him access it.

The Trinidadian national had already been convicted in the UK of possessing criminal property in the form of £170,000. He was arrested on his return from Bermuda.

Spencer initially maintained the investigation was part of a conspiracy against him and claimed he was innocent.

The case was the first of its kind in Bermuda to be tried under the Proceeds of Crime Amendment Act 2007 and 2008, which broadened the definition of the crime.

Yesterday Ms Subair said: "The difficulty is that because this is the first case of its kind, for the purpose of sentencing we do not have any other guideline to refer to besides the UK cases."

She asked the Justices to look at one case in the UK where a man admitted to laundering more than $4 million and was sentenced to 11 years in jail. Ms Subair said the value of funds in that case far exceeded what Spencer was convicted of.

But the Justices said there were differences in the two cases as in the UK case the man had pleaded guilty. They also said the maximum sentence for the offence was 14 years in the UK, while it was 20 years in Bermuda.

Ms Subair said her client had no previous convictions for offences of a similar nature and was of previously good character, yet there were no new mitigating factors to be considered.

Ms Clarke abandoned her appeal that the sentence was manifestly inadequate and the Justices ruled to dismiss the appeal of sentencing and conviction.