The Queen v Alexander Tamati

In the Court of Appeal of New Zealand, the appeal of Alexander Tamati and the application of Paul Laxon for leave to appeal against sentence were heard. Tamati appealed against his conviction, while Laxon sought leave to appeal against his sentence. The appeal was dismissed, and Laxon's application for leave to appeal against sentence was allowed. The sentences of 8½ years on counts 6 and 7 were set aside and replaced by terms of 7½ years. The Court held that the disparity between the sentences of Tamati and Laxon infringed the Lawson test, and the greater concern to the overall administration of justice was that of the disparity.

The legal issues in the appeal were whether the tape recordings and transcripts of them, made by a police officer for the assistance of the jury, were so difficult to hear that the transcript was unreliable, and whether the sentences imposed on Tamati and Laxon were outside the range legitimately open to the sentencing Judge. The Court held that there was no foundation for any submission that the tapes and transcripts were so radically deficient that there was a miscarriage of justice. The Court also held that the disparity between the sentences of Tamati and Laxon infringed the Lawson test. The Court reduced Laxon's lead sentences by one year to meet the disparity.