R v Uluakiola CA123/06

The Court of Appeal of New Zealand was asked to review the conviction and sentence of Sione Tau Uluakiola, who was found guilty of murdering his wife, Kalolina Uluakiola, and causing grievous bodily harm to Alisi Sandys. The appellant also appealed his conviction for threatening to kill Mele Sandys and assaulting her with a weapon. The central issue in the appeal was whether the trial judge had misdirected the jury on the defence of provocation in four ways: by providing a jury questionnaire with a transposition error, ruling expert evidence about the appellant's Tongan ethnicity inadmissible, failing to direct that the accused's background should be considered in relation to the gravity of any provocation, and directing that an intention to kill excluded the defence of provocation. The Court found that the error in the jury questionnaire could not have led to a risk of a miscarriage of justice. The Court also upheld the trial judge's ruling that the appellant's Tongan ethnicity was not a "special characteristic" that could be considered by the jury. The Court rejected the argument that the trial judge's direction that an intention to kill excluded the defence of provocation was incorrect. The Court found that the appellant's conviction for threatening to kill Mele Sandys was supported by the evidence. The Court also dismissed the appeal against the sentence, finding that the trial judge had appropriately considered all relevant factors in determining the sentence. The appeals against conviction and sentence were ultimately dismissed.