An appellant said in his grounds of appeal that the appealed ruling by which he was convicted of possessing a firearm without licence and assaulting public servants and resisting them had insufficient evidence of causation and had erred in the application of law. He said that the court had failed to indicate the aspects of the incident and the elements of the crime. He also said that the court had established its ruling on the grounds of the victim's testimony though it included many contradictions. He also said that the arrest proceedings were invalid.