Donald Robert Alcock’s case failed after his own lawyer could not find any reason why the original conviction was unjust.

At the start of his Brisbane Supreme Court trial in March last year, Donald Robert Alcock, 35, admitted to shooting Anthony Ross Knight in the back in May 2007, so he could steal his honey.

He and his lawyers conceded there was a case against him on the charge of manslaughter, but elected to fight the murder charge brought by the Crown.

At the end of a five-day trial, the jury took less than one day to find him guilty of murdering Mr Knight while he slept at his home at Woodford, in the Sunshine Coast hinterland.

Alcock was sentenced to life imprisonment.

Alcock decided to contest his conviction, however, when the case was heard in the Court of Appeal in Brisbane on Monday, his lawyer said he could not find any reasons why the case result was unsafe or unreasonable.

Barrister Peter Nolan, who took on Alcock’s case pro bono, said he had investigated all elements that usually form the bases for appeal – such as whether the judge had given proper directions, and the strength and presentation of the evidence – but had found they all supported a murder conviction.

“It’s difficult to see how the jury could have arrived at any other view,” he told the court.