Sabau v The State of Western Australia

Sabau was convicted of possessing heroin with the intent to sell or supply it. The matter came before the court for a sentencing appeal, where Sabau argued that the sentence was manifestly excessive. The respondent, the State of Western Australia, contended that the sentence was within the appropriate range. The court was required to determine whether the sentence was manifestly excessive by examining the totality of the circumstances, including the nature of the offence and Sabau's personal circumstances.

The court considered the principles of sentencing as outlined in the relevant legislation and case law. It examined the seriousness of the offence, Sabau's role in the commission of the crime, and the need for deterrence and rehabilitation. The court also took into account Sabau's personal circumstances, including his background, character, and prospects for rehabilitation. The court found that the sentence was not manifestly excessive, as it was within the appropriate range for the offence and took into account the relevant sentencing principles.

Based on the above, the court dismissed the appeal against sentence. The original sentence was upheld, and Sabau's appeal was dismissed in its entirety.