A man convicted of cocaine peddling - but who insists he was misidentified from more than 100-feet away by a policeman on a rainy, dark night - has been cleared and freed by Appeal Court Judges.

The court also overturned the conviction of Clavell Earl Sutton's co-accused Julie Kelly and freed her.

Mr Sutton, 41, of Milden Hall Road, Great Barr, Birmingham, and Ms Kelly, 37, of Liverton Avenue, Middlesbrough, were jailed for three-and-a-half-years in May.

In February they were found guilty at Teesside Crown Court of conspiring on December 8, 1999 with two others - who pleaded guilty- to supply cocaine.

But Lord Justice Keene, sitting with Mr Justice Leveson and Judge James Rant QC, decided their convictions were 'unsafe' due to misdirections to jurors by the trial judge.

The Crown did not seek a retrial.

Early on the evening of December 8, 1999, police stopped a taxi travelling from the Netherfield pub in Middlesbrough containing two people who pleaded guilty and another man.

They found cocaine worth from £2,500 to £3,000, scales, mobile phones and knives.

Miss Kelly had been with one of those in the cab for much of the afternoon but went home at about 4.45pm. The taxi trio had arrived at the pub about 5.15pm.

At 5.23pm a heavily built black man - subsequently identified at Mr Sutton by a constable keeping observation - walked to the pub entrance and motioned to the trio.

Two of them came outside, spoke to the man and one put something in his pocket.

Mr Sutton regularly visited Middlesbrough from his West Midlands home because he had a girlfriend on Teesside.

The Crown relied on the constable identification and on Mr Sutton's high spending on gambling even though he said he was on the dole.

The case against Ms Kelly replied particularly on phone calls from her mobile, a number said to have been made to Mr Sutton.

Mr Sutton maintained he was wrongly identified by the constable and said the money he spent on gambling itself came from gambling.

Lord Justice Keene said the identification of Mr Sutton was clearly at the heart of the case.

The constable who identified Mr Sutton from a video in June 2000 had had a photograph - said to be of poor quality - of him before that date.

On the night of December 8, 1999 it had been dark, raining intermittently and the lighting was very poor.

the constable, who was about 115-feet away from the pub door, said he saw the black man for a total of two minutes. About half that time he saw his profile, and most of the rest of the time he saw his back.

Lord Justice Keene said, in those circumstances the trial judge needed to give a 'clear and careful' direction to the jurors on the dangers of accepting the identification evidence.

But, unhappily, they were not reminded of how far the constable was from the door, nor of the rain, not of the duration of the observation.

Lord Justice Keene said the judge also did not give the jurors an adequate direction about Mr Sutton's good character.

In relation to Ms Kelly the judge had not directed the jurors properly on evidence concerning her lifestyle and had failed to adequately sum up her defence, the appeal judge ruled.