Director of Public Prosecutions v Helem

[2024] VCC 255

IN THE COUNTY COURT OF VICTORIA

Revised

Not Restricted

Suitable for Publication

AT MELBOURNE

CRIMINAL JURISDICTION

CR 23-01925

DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS

v

JOSHUA HELEM

---

JUDGE:	HER HONOUR JUDGE CARLIN
WHERE HELD:	Melbourne
DATE OF HEARING:	7 March 2024
DATE OF SENTENCE:	8 March 2024
CASE MAY BE CITED AS:	DPP v Helem
MEDIUM NEUTRAL CITATION:	[2024] VCC 255

REASONS FOR SENTENCE

---

Subject:  CRIMINAL LAW

Catchwords:             Attempted theft of a motor vehicle; burglary; theft; theft of a motor vehicle; recklessly expose emergency worker to risk whilst driving; related summary offences; child co-offender; ramming police car; brazen and persistent conduct; long history of trauma and disadvantage; schizoaffective disorder bipolar type; post-traumatic stress disorder; early plea of guilty; lengthy criminal history

Legislation Cited:     Sentencing Act 1991 (Vic)

Cases Cited:Nelson v The Queen [2020] VSCA 219; McKay v The King [No 2] [2023] VSCA 8; Nguyen v The King [2023] VSCA 210

Sentence:Total effective sentence of three years imprisonment with a non-parole period of two years. Disqualified from holding a licence for a period of 24 months

---

APPEARANCES:	Counsel	Solicitors
For the Director of Public Prosecutions	Mr D. O'Doherty	Office of Public Prosecutions
For the Accused	Mr J. Miller	Sullivan Braham Barristers & Solicitors

HER HONOUR:

Introduction

1Joshua Helem, on 14 June 2023 you, a then 33-year-old man and your
15-year-old co-offender who, to protect his identity given his age, I shall call Damian, decided it would be fun to break into a caryard in Sale, steal some cars and take them for a joy ride.  When you were intercepted by police, instead of giving up you tried to escape and rammed the police car with your stolen car before driving away, instigating a police pursuit.  Although the pursuit was called off and you managed to get away, the police knew who you were and arrested you on 17 June at your mother’s house in Heyfield.  To compound matters, you should not have been at that house since your mother had an intervention order against you.

2You were charged and remanded in custody where you have been ever since, a total of 265 days, not including today.

3The matter resolved at an early stage and on 7 March 2024 you pleaded guilty before me to one charge of attempted theft of a motor vehicle, punishable by a maximum term of imprisonment of five years; two charges of burglary, punishable by a maximum term of imprisonment of 10 years; one charge of theft, punishable by a maximum term of imprisonment of 10 years; two charges of theft of a motor vehicle, punishable by a maximum term of imprisonment of 10 years; and one charge of recklessly expose emergency worker to risk whilst driving, and that is an aggravated form of that charge which is punishable by a maximum term of imprisonment of 10 years.

4On the same day you also pleaded guilty to related summary offences consisting of committing an indictable offence whilst on bail, punishable by a maximum term of 30 penalty units or three months' imprisonment; one charge of driving a motor vehicle when directed to stop, which is punishable by a maximum term of 60 penalty units or six months' imprisonment; one charge of unlicensed driving, which is punishable by a maximum term of 60 penalty units or six months' imprisonment; and one charge of contravene a family violence intervention order which is punishable by a maximum term of imprisonment of two years or 240 penalty units.

5A plea on your behalf was conducted before me on the same day and it now falls to me to sentence you for your conduct.  Your counsel, Mr Miller, accepted that the only appropriate disposition was a term of imprisonment.

6The prosecutor, Mr O’Doherty, submitted that it should be a term involving a head sentence and a non-parole period and I agree. 

7In arriving at an appropriate sentence, which in your case really means the length of the term of imprisonment, I am required by law to have regard to a variety of factors which I will outline in these sentencing remarks.[1]   Some tend towards leniency, and some point the other way.  No one factor automatically prevails over any other.  Rather, I must have regard to them all and give each the weight it deserves to arrive at a just sentence.  

[1] Section 5(2) of the Sentencing Act 1991.

Circumstances of the offending

8First, I must outline the circumstances of your offending in more detail.  The agreed facts upon which I sentence you are set out in the summary of prosecution opening.[2]  At least some of your offending was captured on CCTV at the car yard.

[2] Exhibit A on the plea

9In short, at about 9.40 pm on Wednesday 14 June 2023 you and Damian attended Turnbull Toyota in York St, Sale, smashed the driver’s window of a Toyota LandCruiser Ute and then tried unsuccessfully to 'hot wire' it
(Charge 1 – the attempted theft of a motor vehicle).  One of you cut yourselves whilst doing that and left blood throughout the Ute.

10You and Damian then smashed a window to the building and climbed inside (Charge 2 – burglary).  You spent up to an hour searching for things to steal and did in fact steal three car registration plates, $300 cash and 11 car keys to a total value of $5,000 (Charge 3 – theft).

11Again, you left a trail of blood throughout the building.

12You and Damian then used one of the keys to gain access to a gold coloured 2018 Toyota LandCruiser Ute which you drove away (Charge 4 – theft of a motor vehicle).

13You returned in that car the next morning at about 2.15 am, parking in Fitzroy Street, around the corner from the car yard, and climbing back inside through the broken window (Charge 5 – burglary).

14You then used one of the keys you had stolen earlier to steal another car, a 2023 Toyota LandCruiser Ute.  Damian drove out of the service area and through the yard, with you in the passenger seat (Charge 6 – theft of motor vehicle).  At this stage you were confronted by one of the owners of the caryard, Toby Turnbull who yelled at you to stop, but you did not, instead swapping seats, so that you were driving. 

15You drove out of the yard across Fitzroy Street into a car wash.  By this time the police, who had been called by Mr Turnbull, had arrived on scene, and two police cars followed you into the car wash from Fitzroy Street, whilst a third police car positioned itself in front of you.

16Senior Constable Jonathon Devine and Sergeant Rick Michalik were in the front police car.  Senior Constable Devine got out of his car, approached your car, drew his firearm and demanded that you stop and get out of the car, but you refused, preferring to try and get away. 

17You reversed your car, whereupon Sergeant Michalik drove the police car right and forward to block you.  You still did not stop, rather you drove forward and rammed the front of the police car before continuing forward and exiting the car wash on York St via the footpath (Charge 7 – aggravated reckless exposure of emergency worker on duty by driving and Summary charge 10 – fail to stop on police direction).  It is an aggravated form of the offence of reckless exposure because the car you were driving was stolen and because of the damage you caused the police car, which from the photographs was quite extensive.

18Police pursued you for several kilometres before terminating the pursuit.

19After you were arrested on 17 June 2023 at your mother’s house (summary charge 13 – contravene family violence intervention order) you were conveyed to the Sale police station for a record of interview.  The police arranged for the presence of an independent third person, but they were not satisfied you understood the caution and did not proceed to interview you. 

Your personal circumstances

20I turn now to your personal circumstances which were outlined in defence submissions, a psychological report from Dr Aaron Cunningham who saw you on 23 February 2024 and a psychiatric report from Dr Anthony Cidoni who saw you on 4 September 2012 in relation to a previous court matter.  Dr Cunningham also spoke to your mother.

21You are now 34 years old and are the eldest in a sibship of three.

22You have a long history of trauma and disadvantage.  You told Dr Cunningham that your father was violent towards your mother, but not the children, and that she was constantly leaving him.  You said she could not cope with the children and that when you were in Grade 3 you went into foster care for over a year. You said you attended 14 different schools up to Year 10.

23Dr Cidoni noted that both your parents had a history of mental illness and substance abuse.  Your father, who died seven years ago, had schizoaffective disorder and your mother has bipolar disorder.

24You were also diagnosed with schizoaffective disorder at age 18 and have had a number of involuntary psychiatric admissions.  You have also been on a community treatment order and been prescribed antipsychotic medication. 
Dr Cidoni said in 2012:

'Mr Helem's illness has been characterised by elevated mood with grandiose delusions and thought disorder, disturbed, agitated and disorganised behaviour.'

25There have been several significant traumatic events in your life.  You say you were raped by a teenage neighbour at age five.  When you were 15, your driving of a stolen Toyota utility caused the death of your younger brother, then aged 13 and the serious injury of another young friend.  You were convicted of culpable driving, negligently causing serious injury, burglary, theft and criminal damage, and at age 17 sentenced to 12 months in a youth training centre.  I have read the sentencing remarks in relation to that matter and the circumstances of you stealing a car from a business and then driving it around are concerningly similar to this matter.  You told Dr Cunningham that you were sexually assaulted by fellow prisoners while in custody at Parkville Correctional Centre.  More recently you have seen two friends killed in crimes of violence.

26Following your release from Parkville, your mother took you out of school to save you from being vilified by other children who were apparently calling you 'murderer'.  Dr Cunningham describes the death of your brother as a 'significant turning point in [your] life'. 

27You moved out of the family home when you were 17 or 18. You told Dr Cunningham that you have worked at a pizza shop, completed a paper round and assisted your uncle in construction, but you have been on a Disability Support Pension since you were 20.

28You have two children who are starting secondary school and have a reasonable relationship with them, at least when you are not in prison.

29When you were 23, you were sentenced to a total of five years' imprisonment for assaulting your grandparents causing serious injury to both.  This is the matter for which Dr Cidoni prepared his report.  You expressed significant remorse to Dr Cidoni in relation to this incident and told him that leading up to it your sister had told you that your grandfather had sexually abused her for her whole life, and that your grandmother had accused your sister of causing your grandfather to do this.  At the time, you also believed that your grandmother was at least partly responsible for the Department of Human Services removing your newborn son from your care.

30You have been in and out of custody for much of your adult life and told Dr Cunningham that you have been intermittently homeless.

31You started smoking cannabis at age 10 and drinking alcohol at age 12.  You told Dr Cunningham that you were recently using one point of methamphetamine and one to two grams of cannabis per day and that you were prescribed 100 mg of Methadone.

32Dr Cunningham considered your presentation to be consistent with your prior diagnosis of schizoaffective disorder bipolar type.  He also opined that you meet the DSM-5 criteria for post-traumatic stress disorder, noting that you have suffered physical and sexual abuse and witnessed death and violence.  He believed your mental illness to be 'severe' and to 'significantly [impair your] ability to maintain stability in accommodation, employment and relationships'.

Objective Gravity of your offending and moral culpability

33Two factors of central importance in determining any sentence are the objective gravity of the offending and the moral culpability of the offender.  If there was any doubt about the seriousness of your offences the maximum penalties make it clear, as does the fact, in relation to Charge 7, that it is subject to two specific sentencing provisions which promote harsher penalties.  First, pursuant to s5(2H) of the Sentencing Act 1991 a custodial sentence (not being one combined with a corrections order) is mandatory for Charge 7 unless certain exceptions exist. Secondly, pursuant to s16(3D) of the Sentencing Act 1991 any term of imprisonment imposed for that charge must be cumulative on any other uncompleted sentence of imprisonment whether imposed before or at the same time, unless otherwise directed.

34Your conduct was brazen and persistent.  It was not a spur of the moment thing; it was sustained criminal activity over several hours.  You had no qualms about damaging property to get what you wanted, you had no qualms about spending a long time illegally inside a building rummaging around for things to steal and you were not satisfied with stealing one car, you had to steal two.  Then when confronted, first by a civilian and then by police, you did not give up, rather you tried to get away.  Even when a gun was pulled on you, you tried to get away and had no compunction about ramming a police car.  This was reckless, dangerous behaviour and utterly lawless.

35What is worse is you did all that in the company of a child.  I know nothing about that child and I am not suggesting that you were necessarily the instigator of the offending, however, the fact is you were the adult in the relationship and you should have been setting a good moral example to that child, not a bad one.  Not only that, you should not have been exposing that child to danger in the way that you did.  

36It is true, as Mr Miller submitted, that burglaries on residential premises are generally regarded by the law as worse than commercial burglaries, but that does not detract from the seriousness of commercial burglaries which still affect innocent people, such as business owners, their customers and society in general, not least by causing increased insurance premiums.  The two cars you stole were both worth over $100,000 and you must have appreciated they were valuable.

37Mr O’Doherty submitted your conduct in ramming the police car was a serious example of the aggravated offence of recklessly exposing an emergency worker to risk.  Mr Miller drew a distinction between your offending and two cases to which he referred me of Nelson and McKay[3].  The risk in Nelson was to four police officers on foot as well as two police officers inside a car.  The offender veered to the wrong side of the road and was driving fast.  The Court of Appeal did not disagree with the sentencing judge's characterisation of the offence as mid-range, nor disturb the sentence imposed of three years.  The risk in McKay was to four police officers who appear from the judgment to have been inside a police car.  It occurred when the offender drove at relatively low speed through a gap next to a police car, damaging both the police car and the car he was driving.  The Court of Appeal assessed the offence as less serious than that in Nelson and substituted a sentence of two years for a sentence of three years, noting that in the relatively short history of the offence the most commonly imposed sentence was one to two years.  Of course those sentences did not depend just on the objective gravity of the offending but took into account all the other matters relevant to sentence.

[3] Nelson v The Queen [2020] VSCA 219 and McKay v The King [No 2] [2023] VSCA 8

38I was told nothing about the speed with which you were driving; however, it is obvious that you deliberately rammed the police car with enough force to cause considerable damage.  It was not, as appeared to be the case in McKay, a situation of you trying to navigate your way between two objects.  True it is, as Mr Miller said, that you only exposed one police officer to danger, however your driving was worse, more violent and therefore more dangerous.  I assess its gravity as falling somewhere between Nelson and McKay.

39In terms of your moral culpability, you told Dr Cunningham that at the time you were not taking your prescribed antipsychotic medication and that you were withdrawing from drugs, including methadone.  You said that you were homeless, 'acting out', and did not care about the consequences of your actions.  As I said to Mr Miller, this seems to be an honest account of your behaviour.  You knew you were doing the wrong thing, but you did not care.  Moreover you have done the wrong thing plenty of times before in similar ways.  Less than a month before this offending you appeared in the Sale Magistrates' Court for a range of offences.  Your prior criminal history increases your moral culpability for your conduct on this night.

40That said, I accept that your moral culpability is reduced somewhat by your mental illness and by your history of disadvantage.  In clarifying that the effects of profound deprivation do not diminish over time, the High Court in Bugmy also emphasised the need for individualised justice according to the circumstances of the case.  Dr Cunningham said:

'In my opinion, Mr Helem's mental illness would cause significant general impairment in his thinking and reasoning ability.  In my opinion,
Mr Helem's mental illness would have impaired his judgment with regard to his offence behaviour and their consequences.  In the context of his trauma, Mr Helem would be prone to reckless and self-destructive behaviour.  Mr Helem's mental state was further burdened at the time of the offences by drug withdrawal and homelessness.'

41Your mental health and your childhood experiences are matters outside of your control and you are not to be blamed for them and nor are you to be judged the same as a person without those disadvantages.  However, whilst you cannot change the past and you cannot change those matters, you can change your drug taking.

Impact of your offending

42I am required to take into account the impact of your offending on your victims and their personal circumstances.[4]

[4] Section 5(2)(daa), (da) and (db).

43I have not received a victim impact statement, but it seems obvious from the damage to the car that what you did would have been frightening to Sergeant Michalik and also that your other actions would have caused great inconvenience to the owners and employees of the Toyota dealership, if not their customers.

Current Sentencing Practices

44To promote consistency of approach in sentencing, particularly the application of relevant principles, I am required to have regard to current sentencing practices which may be gleaned from statistics or sentences imposed in other cases or both.

45As well as the two cases of Nelson and McKay that I have already mentioned, I have also had regard to the most recent Sentencing Advisory Council Statistics of the higher courts. Of course statistics are of limited assistance because they never tell you anything about the details of the case, but they do indicate that 95 per cent of the 71 sentences imposed for the offence of recklessly expose an emergency worker to risk over the five years between 1 July 2017 and 30 June 2022 were an immediate term of imprisonment ranging from a number of months to just over four years, with one to two years being the most common sentence at 48 per cent. This wide variation of sentences reflects the vast disparity in seriousness of the offence and also accords with the observation in McKay.

Plea of Guilty, co-operation and remorse

46You are entitled to a significant discount in your sentence for the fact you pleaded guilty and indicated an intention to do so at a very early stage.  In so doing you facilitated the course of justice and took legal responsibility for your crimes.  Because of your honesty to Dr Cunningham, I also accept that you have some remorse for your offending, although not necessarily a true appreciation of its impact. 

Your character and risk of reoffending

47Your mother continues to be supportive of you, despite the difficulties in your relationship which obviously warranted an intervention order at the time of this offending.  

48Your criminal history suggests your prospects of rehabilitation are bleak. 

49Mr O'Doherty indicated that on his count you have four prior convictions for burglary, two for aggravated burglary, four for unlicensed driving, one for dangerous driving, 15 for theft, eight for contravene a bail condition, nine for committing an offence whilst on bail and one for breaching a family violence intervention order.

50You have received many different dispositions including many terms of imprisonment. 

51It is sad to note that at the time of sentencing you for the culpable driving in 2007 the judge was optimistic about prospects of your rehabilitation.  He noted that despite your difficult life you were doing very well at school.  At that time you had no prior convictions.  I say it is sad because the trajectory of your life has not been as that judge anticipated.  You did not keep out of trouble and you were not deterred by that incident from driving dangerously or stealing cars or driving when you should not be.

52You told me you have never held a licence to drive and that you have had difficulty in getting one.  The combination of being perpetually unlicensed and apparently obsessed with cars and driving is a bad one.  It is a vicious cycle because even if you get a licence, unless you change your behaviour you will probably end up losing it .

53On the basis of the psychometric tests he administered Dr Cunningham assessed you as a moderate-high risk of future violent offending.  He said that your risk can be managed by ceasing drug abuse and maintaining stable accommodation.  He also said ceasing drug use and maintaining stable accommodation would reduce your risk of reoffending, engaging with case management support would improve your prospects of rehabilitation.

54He also opined that long periods of incarceration would further impair your adaptive behaviour and ability to live independently.  He suggested that you would benefit from case management under the National Disability Insurance Scheme, and that ceasing drug use and maintaining stable accommodation would reduce your risk of reoffending.

55I direct that the reports of Dr Cunningham and Dr Cidoni be provided to Corrections to assist with your management in and out of custody.

56Mr Miller informed me that there have been very preliminary steps towards getting you NDIS assistance when you are released from custody.  There has been no application as yet, but you are being assisted by both the Nexus program and the Bridge Centre.  In my view these sentencing remarks, the report of Dr Cunningham and the report of Dr Cidoni should also be provided to the Nexus Program and the Bridge Centre so that they may use them to assist you in obtaining NDIS support.

57You are not without hope, especially if you can get the assistance you need upon your release, but you must change the things that are within your control to change, your drug taking and your attitude to obeying the law.  I hope, but am doubtful, about your prospects of remaining offence free.

The burden of imprisonment

58In determining the appropriate sentence I must consider how a term of imprisonment would be likely to impact you, and how it has impacted you so far, particularly given your mental health.

59Dr Cunningham considered that exposure to further violence and threats in a prison environment would aggravate your trauma symptoms but did not elaborate.  I have no evidence that you are or will be exposed to violence and threats in prison or the likelihood of that happening.  I was told that prison has given you some stability.  As I have already said, Dr Cunningham also opined that long periods of incarceration would further impair your adaptive behaviour and your ability to live independently.

60I take Dr Cunningham’s opinions into account, but I am not satisfied the evidence establishes the application of either Limb 5 or Limb 6 of Verdins.[5]

[5] See Nguyen v The King [2023] VSCA 210 at [16].

Purposes of Sentencing

61I am obliged not to impose a more severe sentence than is necessary to achieve the sentencing purposes of just punishment, deterrence, rehabilitation, denunciation, and protection of the community.  A custodial sentence must only be imposed as a last resort and then must be the absolute minimum required.

62Further, when there are multiple charges, such as here, the total effective sentence must not offend the principle of totality, meaning you must not be punished any more than is proportionate and appropriate to your overall criminality.  That principle is qualified in your case by the presumption of cumulation; however, I still take it into account and I otherwise direct to give effect to my orders.

63Section 317AF came into effect on 5 April 2018 as a result of the Crimes Legislation Amendment (Protection of Emergency Workers and Others) Act 2017 which introduced Division 8A into the Crimes Act 1958. Division 8A created new serious driving offences focused on the safety of emergency workers, custodial officers, youth justice custodial workers and emergency service vehicles. The rationale was to address the prevalence of offenders using motor vehicles to harm police and emergency workers and to recognise that violence towards police and emergency workers in the line of duty is unacceptable and will not be tolerated.

64General deterrence is a paramount sentencing consideration for all your offences, as is, because of your criminal history, specific deterrence.  Those principles are moderated to some extent because of your mental health and history of disadvantage but they are still important, as is the need to protect the community from you.

65I will allow for your rehabilitation by setting as low a non-parole period as possible consonant with the seriousness of the offences and your history.  Of course it is up to the Adult Parole Board if and when you are released on parole.    Stand up please, Mr Helen.

Sentence

66Weighing up the competing considerations as best I can, you are convicted on each charge and sentenced to terms of imprisonment as follows.  I will incorporate this sentence in tabular form at the end of these remarks. 

67On Charge 1, the attempted theft of a motor vehicle, six months.

68On Charge 2, an offence of burglary, 12 months.

69On Charge 3, theft, six months.

70On Charge 4, theft of a motor vehicle, 10 months.

71On Charge 5, burglary, 12 months.

72On Charge 6, theft of a motor vehicle, 10 months.

73On Charge 7, aggravated reckless exposure of emergency worker by driving, two years.

74On Summary Charge 5, commit indictable offence whilst on bail, two months.

75On Summary Charge 10, driving a motor vehicle when directed to stop, one month.

76On Summary Charge 11, unlicensed driving, one month.

77On Summary Charge 13, contravene family violence intervention order, one month.

78The sentence on Charge 7 is the base sentence.  I direct that one month of the sentence on Charge 1, two months of the sentence on Charge 2, one month of the sentence on Charge 3, two months of the sentence on Charge 4, one month of the sentence on Charge 5, two months of the sentence on Charge 6, one month of the sentence on Summary Charge 5, 14 days of the sentence on Summary Charge 10, one month of the sentence on Summary Charge 11 and 14 days of the sentence on Summary Charge 11 be cumulative with each other and on the base sentence of two years on Charge 7.

79That makes a total effective sentence of three years and in respect of that sentence I set a non-parole period of two years.

80I declare that you have already served a total of 265 days pre-sentence detention, not including today, in respect of this sentence and order that that declaration be entered in the records of the court and that the period be deducted administratively.

81If you had not pleaded guilty to these charges and then been found guilty by a jury, I would have sentenced you to a total effective sentence of imprisonment of four years with a non-parole period of three years. 

82I am also required to make some orders in relation to your licence.  In fact, you do not have a licence which means rather than cancelling your licence I make orders of disqualification.

83As Charge 7 is categorised as a serious motor vehicle offence, I am obliged under s89 of the Sentencing Act to disqualify you from holding a licence for a minimum of 24 months.  I will not exceed that time.  Accordingly, on Charge 7, I order that you are disqualified from holding a licence for a period of 24 months commencing today.

84Further, pursuant to s89 of the Sentencing Act 1991 I am required to disqualify you from holding a licence on the theft of motor vehicle and attempted theft of motor vehicle charges for such period as I specify.  On each of those charges I will disqualify you for the same period as Charge 7, that is two years, commencing today.  I did not discuss the licence disqualification but I have double-checked and I am pretty sure that I am obliged to do that.

85Do you understand the sentence that I have imposed, Mr Helem?

86OFFENDER:  Yes.

87HER HONOUR:  So three years with a minimum of two years.  The time you have already spent in custody comes off that.  It is up to the Adult Parole Board whether you are released then or whenever.  You need to do something to try and get your life in order otherwise you will end up spending most of your life in custody.

88OFFENDER:  Yes, I realise that.

89HER HONOUR:  I hope so.  We will adjourn the court.

No.	Charge	Maximum Penalty	Sentence	Cumulation
1	Attempted theft of a motor vehicle	5 years imprisonment	6m	1m
2	Burglary	10 years imprisonment	12m	2m
3	Theft	10 years imprisonment	6m	1m
4	Theft of a motor vehicle	10 years imprisonment	10m	2m
5	Burglary	10 years imprisonment	12m	1m
6	Theft of a motor vehicle	10 years imprisonment	10m	2m
7	Aggravated Reckless exposure of emergency worker by driving	10 years imprisonment	2 years	Base
Summary charge 5	Commit indictable offence whilst on bail	30 penalty units or 3 months imprisonment	2m	1m
Summary charge 10	Driving a motor vehicle when directed to stop	60 p.u. or 6 months imprisonment	1m	14 days
Summary charge 11	Unlicensed driving	60 p.u. or 6 months imprisonment	1m	1m
Summary charge 13	Contravene family violence intervention order	2 years imprisonment or 240 p.u.	1m	14 days

Total Effective Sentence: 

3 years

Non-Parole Period:

2 years

Pre-Sentence detention declaration pursuant to s 18(1) of the Sentencing Act 1991:

 265 days

6AAA Statement:  4 years with a npp of 3 years

Other relevant orders:

Orders against licence

·       

---