Pembroke last year began appeals against their convictions yesterday.

Teiko Furbert and Sheldon Franks were sentenced to life imprisonment in April of this year after being convicted for the murder of James Cyrus Caines, 28, who died after a bullet struck him in the face on July 6, 1996 at a Curving Avenue home.

Furbert and Franks were found guilty by majority verdicts of nine to three and 11 to one respectively.

Queen's Counsel John Perry said he would be representing Furbert but noted that his client and Franks -- who was represented by Mark Pettingill -- had some common grounds of appeal.

Mr. Pettingill added that he would deal with some of the grounds of appeal for his client while Mr. Perry would cover others. He would adopt his arguments "subject to what he had to say''.

Mr. Perry said he did not want to be seen like he was putting "the boot'' into Franks during his submissions because if his client's appeal was upheld in the end then so would the co-accused's.

He began by saying trial judge Puisne Judge Richard Ground simply re-read the evidence during his summation and then sent the jury out. He should have identified the evidence on which the convictions should rest or the links between the evidence and the law, said Mr. Perry.

He added that a provision for manslaughter should have also been made during Mr. Justice Ground's direction of the jury.

And he questioned Franks' testimony that Furbert fired the shot which killed Mr. Caines.

Forensic evidence showed gunshot residue on the front of Furbert's shirt.

However it also showed residue on the front and right sleeve of Franks' shirt and on the front left pocket of his trousers, he pointed out.

A forensics' expert testified that the residue on Furbert's shirt could have come from as far away as ten feet, added Mr. Perry.

This evidence indicated Franks could have fired the gun but he still took the witness box and indicated that Furbert had shot Mr. Caines.

The trial judge should have provided some direction for the jury on this, he said.

Mr. Perry pointed to a no case submission by Furbert's lawyer Archibald Warner during the original trial which was overturned.

There were a number of matters concerning the admissibility of evidence, he continued, and he covered these.

Furbert's presence at the scene on the night of the offence was explicable by witness testimony which stated that was where he normally hung out, said Mr.

Perry.

He added that the defendants' mere presence at the scene of an offence did not render them guilty of the offence.

Mr. Caines' mother's testimony stated that before her son was shot, Furbert accused him of taking packages. But Sandra Cyrus did not give a time when this accusation was made so it could have been anytime before the shooting, noted Mr. Perry.

Therefore to imply this was motive was putting the cart before the horse, he continued, because there was no idea of how long before the shooting it had happened.

He then turned to Det. Con. Maxwell's conversation with Furbert which occurred moments before the defendant was due to go to Magistrates' Court and be charged.

He said Det. Con. Maxwell did not invite Furbert to read or sign the notes he made of their conversation and later seemed to be confused as to when he made the notes.

At one point the Police officer said he made the notes contemporaneously but then said he made them subsequently, said Mr. Perry. Mr. Justice Ground should have stepped in and declared this evidence inadmissible, he said.

If this evidence had been ruled inadmissible then there would have been no clear evidence that Mr. Furbert was "party to any exercise'', said Mr. Perry.