Saleh v The Queen

The case of Saleh v The Queen involved the applicant, Saleh, who had pleaded guilty to manslaughter by criminal negligence after a motor vehicle he was driving fatally struck a pedestrian. The sentence imposed was eight years and six months’ imprisonment, with a non-parole period of six years. Saleh sought leave to appeal against the sentence, arguing that the sentencing judge had erred in several respects.

The primary legal issues for the court to decide were whether the sentencing judge had erred in the consideration of current sentencing practices, whether the judge had erred in the treatment of the guilty plea, and whether the sentence was manifestly excessive. Saleh argued that the sentence was disproportionately harsh when compared to other similar cases and that the sentencing judge had not adequately considered the mitigating factors of his guilty plea.

The court found that while the sentence was at the higher end of the scale, it did not demonstrate any error on the part of the sentencing judge in considering current sentencing practices or in the treatment of the guilty plea. However, the court did conclude that the sentence was manifestly excessive. This finding was based on the disproportionate severity of the sentence relative to the mitigating factors, including the guilty plea. Consequently, the court granted leave to appeal on the ground that the sentence was manifestly excessive, but ultimately dismissed the appeal as there was no point of principle that warranted further consideration by a higher court.