Director of Public Prosecutions v Hill
[2014] VCC 1966
•17 November 2014
| IN THE COUNTY COURT OF VICTORIA | Revised Not Restricted Suitable for Publication |
AT MELBOURNE
CRIMINAL JURISDICTIONCR
| DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS |
| v |
| JARROD WARD HILL |
---
| JUDGE: | HER HONOUR JUDGE DOUGLAS |
| WHERE HELD: | Melbourne |
| DATE OF HEARING: | |
| DATE OF SENTENCE: | 17 November 2014 |
| CASE MAY BE CITED AS: | DPP v Hill |
| MEDIUM NEUTRAL CITATION: | [2014] VCC 1966 |
REASONS FOR SENTENCE
---Subject:
Catchwords:
Legislation Cited:
Cases Cited:
Sentence:---
APPEARANCES: | Counsel | Solicitors |
| For the Director of Public Prosecutions | Ms D. Hogan | |
| For the Offender | Mr D. Dann |
HER HONOUR:
1Jarrod Ward Hill, you have pleaded guilty to recklessly cause serious injury to Samuel Blanchett - I had better spell it because those transcribing do not seem to look at the indictment or any documents any more, B-l-a-n-c-h-e-t-t, Charge 1, and making a threat to Samuel Blanchett, having made the threat to him, Charge 2. These charges were committed on 15 March 2013.
2The maximum penalties for these serious offences are as follows. Recklessly cause serious injury, 15 years' imprisonment. Making a threat to kill, ten years' imprisonment.
3On 18 September 2014, you pleaded guilty to the two charges. Mr Dann of counsel appeared on your behalf and made submissions and set out your personal details. He also relied upon a psychological report of Carla Lechner, dated 5 March 2014. That report was tendered on your behalf.
4The plea hearing was adjourned to enable a psychiatric assessment to be conducted, as Ms Lechner reported that your history suggested mood variations independent of drug use that may be bipolar or cyclothymic mood disorder, that is c-y-c-l-o-t-h-y-m-i-c.
5The matter was adjourned for a mention on 31 October 2014. At that time a psychiatric report of Dr Lester Walton, dated 16 October 2014, was tendered on your behalf.
6A further plea hearing was held today, 17 September 2014.
7Further documents were tendered this morning to which I will refer. A document headed "Summary of prosecution opening" which was tendered and read aloud in court, sets out comprehensively the circumstances of the offending in relation to each of the incidents. Photographs depicting the injuries to the complainant, Mr Blanchett, were also tendered.
8A victim impact statement was tendered on behalf of Mr Blanchett, who has suffered physically and emotionally as a result of the brutal attack you carried out. I take into account the contents of that victim impact statement.
9Victim impact statements are of assistance for sentencing judges as each provides the judge with an account from the victim as to the effect of the offending on him at the time of offending and present time. Each victim impact statement is made from the personal perspective of the author of that statement as to the effect of the offending and is invaluable to a sentencing judge who would otherwise make assumptions or rely on statements made by victims to investigating detectives, in which the focus at that time is on setting out the offending for those investigating to apprehend the offender.
10Each of the two incidents in Charge 1 and Charge 2 were committed on the same day but were separate in time. Each of the incidents was a serious offence. The incident in relation to Charge 1 was a gratuitous and vicious attack with a weapon. Although you and Mr Blanchett had had a verbal disagreement that had become heated, he physically left the premises to avoid any further confrontation. You followed him. He did not engage in any further verbal disagreement. He did not threaten you verbally or physically. He did not have a weapon and there was no basis for any belief that he may have had a weapon. It was clear that he was walking away. In the circumstances your gratuitous attack on him was cowardly, as you used the weapon on an unarmed man who was not expecting such an attack. Further, your conduct afterwards was callous as you showed no concern for him.
11The incident in relation to Charge 2 was also a situation where there was no provocative conduct directed at you. You contacted Mr Blanchett having no empathy or sympathy for him, concerned solely about your predicament, as you must have realised that your earlier attack on him was likely to involve the attention of police. Your threat, "If you ring the police about this I'll kill you. Watch out because I'm going to sort you out," indicates you were attempting to intimidate him as you were not prepared to take responsibility for the injury that you would have realised you had caused.
12Mr Dann appeared on your behalf and your instructions to him were that on that evening you knew the people who were present at those premises including Mr Blanchett. Further, that those present were involved in using illegal drugs and were heavy consumers of alcohol. It was conceded by you through your counsel that you overreacted. You say that the weapon you used was a fishing knife that you had in your car. There was no evidence that you did not use the fishing knife so I sentence you on that basis. Whether or not one or more of these people were heavily involved in drugs or alcohol, as you say, is of little or no assistance, as there was no evidence that any of those people, in particular Mr Blanchett, conducted themselves in any untoward way towards you or any other person in your presence. It was you and you alone who used a weapon and seriously injured another person. As I stated, it is significant that you at no time faced a threat be it verbal or physical at that time.
13A previous criminal history was attached to the indictment. Your prior convictions are from court appearances from 24 June 2005 to 27 July 2011.
14On 24 June 2005, you were convicted of recklessly cause serious injury and assault with a weapon and placed on a community-based order for 18 months. You were also found guilty of possession of non-prohibited handgun without a licence and fined $60. I have been informed that it was in relation to a fight in which the other person was armed with a knife and at the time you held the belief you were acting in self-defence.
15I have been informed that you subsequently breached that community-based order as you were working full time and did not comply with the conditions. On 3 April 2007, you were convicted of failing to comply with the community-based order. You were convicted of failing to comply with the community-
16based order. You were convicted of that breach and fined an aggregate sum of $2,000 for the offences.
17On 2 June 2010, you were found guilty of assault and placed on an adjourned undertaking for 12 months. I am informed that that incident was in relation to one of your sisters, who continues to suffer from mental illness.
18On 27 July 2011 you were found guilty of failing to comply with that adjourned undertaking and were placed on another adjourned undertaking for 12 months. You breached that adjourned undertaking, as on 13 December 2010 you were found guilty of failing to give your name and address, failing to report to the police and owning an unregistered vehicle. Those offences arose from a car accident where there was only property damage.
19As a sentencing judge in this matter, I must give weight to general deterrence, that is, to deter other people like you from gratuitous violent attacks with the use of a weapon in the circumstances you committed (Charge 1) as well as engaging and threatening conduct, which is directed to undermine, in my view, the criminal justice system by instilling fear into people if they make a legitimate complaint to police. That is Charge 2.
20People are entitled to feel safe in public, as well as at the homes of friends or acquaintances. In this case Mr Blanchett decided to avoid any disputation with you, so he walked away, no doubt in the belief that he was safe, not assuming you would follow him and attack him. Further, people are entitled to seek protection and assistance from the police in the circumstances he found himself.
21I must also give weight to just punishment, denunciation and protection of the community.
22You are currently 30 years of age, having been born on 14 November 1983. You were raised in Montrose and your parents are now retired. You have two sisters, one who is 33 and one who is 36. Unfortunately, one of your sisters, as I had said, has a mental illness. Your family background is unremarkable, save for the background of sexual abuse of your family by a relative. A reference tendered this morning, which was written by your parents on your behalf, referred to that matter amongst other things, and set out the adverse effect, not only on your sisters, but on you and the family.
23You told Dr Walton you had a disrupted childhood, as your family tended to be ostracised by relatives of your father because of the disclosure of sexual abuse by a relative. There was also some disharmony in relation to your mother's relatives.
24Your school performance was described by Dr Walton as haphazard. You attended Heathmont Secondary School from Year 7 to the start of Year 12. You left school and worked with your father in a plastering business for about a year. You then attended Swinburne College in Croydon, where you completed Year 12. You told the psychologist, Carla Lechner, that at this stage you were taking drugs and involved in some violent conflicts with drug dealers, one of whom pulled a knife on you. After leaving school, you worked in various positions, mainly sales. You worked as a plasterer in your family and undertook other work; direct marketing, worked as a general manager in a car yard. This was when you breached your community-based order. You have also worked in hospitality and, in 2001, selling Green Balloon energy. Your work has been sporadic, as you have been a drug user during that period.
25You have had one long-term relationship lasting a number of years. You have one child, Tate, aged five years, who was born during that relationship and with whom you have your closest emotional attachment. At the time of the plea hearings in September and October of this year you had not been permitted to have any contact with him. However, this morning, on the last plea hearing date, your former partner and mother of your little boy, Sandra Biggs, was in court to support you, and Mr Dann informed the court that she has been in contact with you whilst you have been in prison and arrangements have been made for you to continue to have contact with your son. I presume that that will be the case while you are drug-free. As I said, your parents are also in court to support you.
26Before you were remanded in custody in relation to this matter, you were in a relationship with a woman Sarah. However, that relationship has ended.
27Twelve months before the evening of 15 March, you had been living a transient lifestyle, mixing with those who were also drug users. You were using methylamphetamines, and your instructions are consistent with the report of Carla Lechner and Dr Lester Walton, that the offending must be seen in the context of use of methylamphetamine.
28You told Dr Walton that you had not been using drugs for around three months before the evening, that on that particular evening you had taken a modest amount of methylamphetamines, about ten milligrams of diazepam, which had been prescribed, and a substantial mixture of beer, wine and vodka. You have agreed that there was no reason for this brutal attack, as you bore no ill-feelings to Mr Blanchett.
29You have been abusing alcohol and drugs for a substantial period of your life. You commenced drinking alcohol when you were 14 years of age, and as an adult you became a regular user on a binge drinking base, about a dozen stubbies of full-strength beer at a sitting. You began smoking cannabis at 13 years of age and by the age of 15 years you were using half a gram a day, which escalated to what you considered dependency by the age of 18. You informed Dr Walton that you stopped using cannabis when you were around 21. However, by the age of 20 you had commenced using amphetamines and then progressed to intermittent use of methylamphetamines. You stopped using illegal drugs after the birth of your child, but by the age of 28, after the breakdown of your relationship, you recommenced using methylamphetamines to a point where you were using half a gram daily after six months.
30Dr Walton reported that you have a history of chronic anxiety and depression in diagnosable proportion, in that you were suffering from a long-term mixture of anxiety/depressive disorder.
31Dr Walton and Ms Lechner referred to the adverse psychological effect on you of the sexual abuse in your family. Dr Walton reported that it is likely you were suffering from attention deficit hyperactivity disorder as a child and that your academic performance was consistent with that. However, at this stage, and drug-free in prison, you are able to concentrate quite adequately and there was no evidence of hyperactivity.
32As to the query raised by the psychologist, Carla Lechner, Dr Walton reported that in his opinion the diagnosis of bipolar disorder can be excluded.
33I accept that you resorted to using illegal drugs, in particular amphetamine-based drugs, to deal with the disagreeable mood disturbances you experienced. Dr Walton reported that you have reached a point where you are properly described as a substance dependent person, albeit not at the moment, as you are currently drug-free in prison.
34Ms Lechner reported that you present with a complex clinical picture. That picture is characterised by symptoms of stimulant use disorder with underlying symptoms of mood disturbance, anxiety and features of post-traumatic stress disorder. It was for that reason she sought a psychiatric assessment. She said this:
"He is easily bored and longs for a high level of stimulation, this often resulting in engagement and high risk behaviour. He has been abusing drugs since the age of 13, with periods of peak use coinciding with times of high anxiety.
Mr Hill stated that he is bothered by memories of the past that he wishes to block out. Most recently he was disturbed to hear that his young son had allegedly been exposed to some form of inappropriate sexual behaviour. This triggered a high level of distress and increased ice use."
35Further in the report she said this:
"At interview, Mr Hill impressed as capable of reflecting on the impact that his behaviour has had on both himself and others, but easily overwhelmed by social and emotional factors that may undermine his judgment and decision-making. He is impulsive in nature, has a low tolerance for frustration and a strong desire for immediate ratification.
Mr Hill is able to identify some triggers to his negative feelings, but is less well able to express them in an adaptive manner, tending to block out internal distress with drug use. He is currently evidencing symptoms of clinical depression with a score in the extreme range on the Beck Depression Inventory."
36As to these charges, Dr Lester Walton reported:
"Mr Hill seems to have engaged in an act of essentially unprovoked serious violence which has a rather bizarre quality, and the fact that it is essentially out of character for him does cry out for psychiatric rather than a more conventional criminal explanation. However, it remains the case that neither Mr Hill nor I can identify any meaningful motivation for the aggression. He certainly would have been disinhibited by the combination of drugs and alcohol he had taken at the time, but that falls short of a comprehensive explanation."
37Further, Dr Walton reported:
"While it is the case that it is highly likely that Mr Hill would have been afflicted by significant anxiety and depression at the material times simply because those problems have existed for so long, I doubt that the mood disturbance would have compromised his ability to exercise proper social judgment other than in a minor fashion, although perhaps enough to open the door to Verdins considerations at least to a minor degree."
38As to the decision R v Verdins, Buckley and Vo (2007) 16 VR 269, I sentence you on the basis that there is a nexus between your underlying anxiety, depression, post-traumatic stress disorder in relation to sexual abuse to your family from a relative and thereafter caused you to rely on amphetamine-based drugs and alcohol to what is known as self-medicating yourself. I sentence you on the basis that there is a causal connection between your underlying psychological issues and the use of illegal drugs and excessive quantities of alcohol.
39The use of the cocktail of drugs and alcohol that you had ingested that night, Valium, alcohol, methylamphetamine, is the most probable explanation for your disinhibited behaviour. As I stated, I sentence you on the basis that your underlying condition to which I have referred reduces the moral culpability to a small extent of your offending. I sentence you on the basis that I have moderated general deterrence and specific deterrence as well. Perhaps I omitted to say, and therefore, I sentence you on the basis that your moral culpability is reduced to a small extent.
40
You have been in custody since 22 May 2013, which is around 18 months. However, on 18 October 2013 you were sentenced to three months' imprisonment with 148 days declared by that sentencing court as
pre-sentence detention.
41I take into account in your favour that, therefore, you served around two months in custody in relation to that matter, that two months being unable to be taken into account in your favour, as the pre-sentence detention was 148 days and your sentence was 90 days. I also take into account in your favour that had you been sentenced for this matter earlier, it is likely there would have been orders made for partial concurrency with this sentence.
42I have given weight in your favour to rehabilitation. The time you have spent in custody in the Melbourne Remand Centre in pre-sentence detention has provided me with some optimism, albeit guarded, as to your chances of rehabilitation. In your case rehabilitation is remaining abstinent from alcohol or drugs. Clearly, alcohol is not an illegal drug, but in your case, given your long history of abusing alcohol and using amphetamine-based drugs in particular, your rehabilitation requires you to be abstinent from all drugs, including alcohol. Your rehabilitation depends on that to an enormous extent. In your favour you acknowledged that in a letter you wrote to the court which was read aloud this morning.
43I take into account that you will have the continuing support of your family. Your parents are in court to support and wrote a reference, as did your cousin. It is significant that you have been drug-free for around 18 months. This is the first occasion that you have been in prison, and I accept that you have taken the opportunity to take steps to initiate your rehabilitation. It is likely that you have taken these steps for the first time during your life, in recent years, you have been clear-headed without drugs or excessive alcohol affecting your judgment.
44I accept also you now have insight as to your offending. You have not had any positive results from blood tests, the results being tendered on your behalf. In your favour, you have used your time constructively in prison by completing relevant programs, which include drug and alcohol programs, an upon release harm induction program, anger management, mood management and conflict management. You have taken all the opportunities offered to complete those courses.
45Ms Lechner reported that you impressed her as capable of reflecting on the impact your behaviour has had on both you and others. She reported, however, that you are easily overwhelmed by social and emotional factors that may undermine your judgment and decision making. She reported that you are impulsive, have a low tolerance for frustration and a strong desire for immediate gratification. However, in your favour she said that you were able to identify some triggers to your negative feelings but you were less able to express them in an adaptive manner. Therefore, you tended to block out internal distress with drug use.
46The more recent report from Dr Lester Walton, he consulted with you on 15 October 2014, reflects your positive attitude to rehabilitation. Dr Walton reported that you knew that you had been troubled by anxiety and depression for as long as you can remember and you now see that your use of alcohol and drugs were self-medicating. You told Dr Walton the previous feelings of paranoia have faded in the context of you currently being drug-free. You also told him that you felt as though you have changed as a person, which is demonstrated, in Dr Walton's opinion, by your application to physical fitness and engaging in meditation and the limited educational opportunities offered in remand.
47Dr Walton reported:
"He has now reached a point where he has abstained from substance abuse for the longest period to date and he expressed a strong determination to remain drug and alcohol-free for the indefinite future."
48Further, under the heading "Opinion" he reported:
"Mr Hill does impress as a reasonably intelligent and insightful man and I believe he could make good use of talking therapy."
49Clearly, you have suffered from significant anxiety and depression, not only at the time of this incident, but also for a considerable period of your life, which I accept is the underlying reason for ingesting illicit substances and abusing alcohol.
50
Consequently, as I have already stated, I consider that the decision of
R v Verdinsapplies to reduce your moral culpability, and as I said, I have accorded less weight, albeit it minor, to matters of deterrence.
51
Gratuitous violence, especially with the use of a weapon, attracts condign punishment. The Court of Appeal of this State has made it clear to sentencing judges that such conduct will not be countenanced. Members of the community who behave in a law-abiding fashion are entitled to go about their business without a person following them and attacking them. You put
Mr Blanchett through a terrifying ordeal and he continues to suffer, as I said, the adverse effects of your cowardly attack.
52I have also given weight to specific deterrence, that is deterring you. You are a man with prior convictions of violent offences as well as subsequent matters. I sentence you on the basis that your drug abuse and alcohol abuse has been the catalyst for your offending. Your prior history reflects, although you have had a history of abusing drugs and alcohol, you are not normally a violent man in that the offences you have committed which are offences of violence. You received dispositions indicating the offending was not considered particularly serious by the sentencing court.
53You have a subsequent matter of breaching a family violence intervention order in relation to a former girlfriend. Subsequent matters are relevant only to specific deterrence.
54
I take into account your plea of guilty, which has saved the community the cost and inconvenience of a trial, and importantly, the complainant,
Mr Blanchett, from giving evidence at the trial and reliving his ordeal again.
55I sentence you on the basis that you are remorseful, that you have shown insight. I have come to this conclusion, not only because of the letter of apology to the victim and the letter to the court, both of which have come very late, importantly, what you have done, not what you have said, that is, the assessment of Ms Lechner and Dr Walton, and importantly, the positive steps you have taken whilst on remand as well as your plea of guilty. As I have said, I have taken into account in your favour that you have been in gaol for 18 months with 396 days pre-sentence detention.
56In the circumstances, as a man who has not served a term of imprisonment before, I sentence you on the basis that prison will have been, and continue to be, harder for you than a person who has served a period of youth detention or prison.
57
My task is to impose a just sentence, taking into account the seriousness of each of these offences, the gravity of the offending conduct and applying the relevant sentencing principles to which I have referred. I must also take into account your personal circumstances, mitigating factors raised by counsel, as well as current sentencing practices. I also take into account the
pre-sentence detention of 396 days as having been already served.
58I sentence you as follows. If you could stand up when I sentence you, please.
59Charge 1, recklessly cause serious injury, two and a half years' imprisonment.
60Charge 2, making a threat to kill, 12 months' imprisonment.
61I order that six months - just excuse me for a moment. Sorry, you can sit down for a moment, I have made an error.
62Excuse me, Madam Associate, just before I sentence, I have made an error.
63Sorry, I made an error and I will do that in favour of you.
64It is Charge 1, recklessly cause serious injury, two and a half years' imprisonment; making a threat to kill, 12 months' imprisonment.
65The total sentence, therefore, is 30 months' imprisonment, and I order that you serve a minimum of 15 months' imprisonment before you become eligible for parole.
66Had you pleaded not guilty, pursuant to s.6AAA, I would have sentenced you to four years' imprisonment with a minimum of two and a half years before you become eligible for parole.
67Are there any matters?
68MS HOGAN: I'm just confirming that Your Honour has declared the s.18 PSD.
69HER HONOUR: Well, I said it first, not ‑ ‑ ‑
70MS HOGAN: Thank you, Your Honour.
71HER HONOUR: No, that's all right. I think that's right, I did it - you can sit down for a moment. I did it in an order that's a little different.
72MS HOGAN: Yes, Your Honour.
73HER HONOUR: I take into account 396 days which have already been served.
74MS HOGAN: As Your Honour pleases.
75HER HONOUR: Very well. Is my arithmetic right?
76MS HOGAN: Yes, Your Honour.
77HER HONOUR: Very well. If you could remove the prisoner, Mr Prison Officer.
‑ ‑ ‑
Indictment No. C13563910
Court Reference: CR-14-00071
IN THE COUNTY COURT OF VICTORIA
AT MELBOURNE
CRIMINAL JURISDICTION
THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS
–v–
JARROD WARD HILL
Date of document: | 16 September 2014 |
Filed on behalf of: | The Director of Public Prosecutions |
| Prepared by: Office of Public Prosecutions 565 Lonsdale Street Melbourne Vic 3000 | Solicitor’s code: 7539 Telephone: (03) 9603 7666 Reference: |
SSUMMARY OF PROSECUTION OPENING
The offender, Jarrod Ward Hill, was born on the 14th of November 1983. At the time of the offending he was 29 years of age.
On Friday the 15th of March 2013 at about 9.00pm, the victim, Samuel Blanchett, visited his friend, Adam Lewis, at 2/18 Louisa Street in Croydon. Present at the address were Mr Lewis, Neil McKeller, Christopher Vellios and Mr Hill. Mr Hill and Mr Blanchett had first met about three to four months prior to this incident and had seen each other on a few occasions.
At about 10.10pm Mr Blanchett and Mr Lewis had a verbal disagreement that became heated. Mr Blanchett decided that he would leave the unit to avoid further confrontation. He left the unit and was followed by the others. Mr Blanchett walked up the driveway towards Louisa Street and as he reached the nature strip, he felt something hit his left leg and then immediately afterwards felt something hit his right leg about three times. Mr Blanchett then saw Mr Hill bending down behind him. Mr Blanchett asked him what he was doing and he replied, “I’m fucking you up”. Mr Blanchett responded by saying, “Fuck you” and then walked towards his car. Mr Blanchett felt pain in his legs. (Charge 1 – Recklessly causing serious injury)
Mr Blanchett walked about three or four houses along from Mr Lewis’ unit; he then turned around and saw Mr Hill standing out the front of the property holding a machete. Mr Blanchett got into his vehicle and noticed a pool of blood was forming in the foot well of his car and he realised that his legs had been cut.
Mr McKellar observed that Mr Hill was holding what he thought was a meat cleaver, which Mr Hill placed down the front of his pants, before placing it in the boot of his vehicle.
Mr Blanchett drove to his father’s house and was then driven to the emergency department of the Maroondah Hospital by his father. Whilst he was in the emergency department, Mr Hill called him and said, “If you ring the Police about this I will kill you. Watch out, because I’m gonna come sort you out”. Mr Hill hung up on him. (Charge 2 – Threat to kill)
Mr Blanchett had a wound to his left ankle, which was five centimetres long, it was a deep laceration. He also had a wound to his right calf area, it was eight centimetres long, with muscle protruding and disruption to internal structures. Mr Blanchett’s left ankle was x-rayed, which revealed a fracture of the lateral malleolus. Mr Blanchett spent two days in hospital and underwent surgery to repair muscle and nerve damage to his right calf. His left ankle was placed in a plaster cast. Mr Blanchett was restricted to a wheel chair and required rehabilitation to enable him to walk again.
Police obtained the call charge records of Mr Hill which confirm that he called Mr Blanchett on his mobile phone eighteen times between 10.40pm on the 15th of March 2013 and 3.25pm on the 16th of March 2013. Mr Hill’s phone records also place him in close proximity to Louisa Street in Croydon at the time of the offending. Mr Blanchett identified Mr Hill from a photoboard that was shown to him by Police.
On the 22nd of May 2013, Mr Hill was arrested and taken to the Ringwood Police Station. He was interviewed by Police and denied the allegations and stated that he was in New South Wales with his cousin at the time that the offending took place. He also stated that he used amphetamines in the past (Q/A 168) and that he has a mental health care plan and he has an issue of blacking out (Q/A 170). He stated that he was in hospital during the month of March (Q/A 304).
MAXIMUM PENALTIES
The maximum penalty for Recklessly Causing Serious Injury is level 4 imprisonment (15 years maximum) per s.16 Crimes Act 1958.
The maximum penalty for Threat to Kill is level 5 imprisonment (10 years maximum) per s.20 Crimes Act 1958.
TIMING OF PLEA
A contested committal was held on the 9th of January 2014. The matter resolved to the charges on the indictment on the 26th of June 2014.
APPLICATIONS
Disposal order: Application is made for a Disposal Order pursuant to s77 Confiscation Act 1997.
PRE-SENTENCE DETENTION
The offender was arrested on the 22nd of May 2013. He has remained in custody since that date. On the 18th of October 2013 he was sentenced in the Melbourne Magistrates’ Court to 3 months imprisonment and 148 days were declared as pre-sentence detention. As at the 17th of December 2014 he has spent 396 days in custody to be declared as pre-sentence detention for these offences.
0