Harvey v The Queen

Eruera Harvey and Libya Curtis Tamihere were co-offenders in a violent gang-related home invasion. Harvey was sentenced to five years' imprisonment, while Tamihere received six years. They appealed against their sentences, arguing that the starting point for Harvey was excessive given his limited involvement and that the judge should have applied a discount for Tamihere's youth.

The Court of Appeal found that the judge had appropriately assessed Harvey's involvement, considering his admissions and the overall circumstances of the offending. The Court noted that Harvey played a support role in the invasion and that the difference in starting points between him and Tamihere accurately reflected their relative involvement. The appeal against Harvey's sentence was dismissed.

Regarding Tamihere, the Court acknowledged that he was impulsive and immature at the time of the offending, and a modest discount for youth could have been appropriate. However, the Court found that the overall sentence was not manifestly excessive and dismissed the appeal. The judges concluded that a 20-month discount, which included both the head injury and youth, was adequate in the circumstances.