10 May 2022
The Court held that the overall sentence of three months' community detention and six months' supervision was within range and not an error, but the 13 month disqualification was disproportionate given the historic nature of earlier convictions and rehabilitative considerations; the disqualification was reduced to 12 months to achieve proportionality while upholding road safety objectives.
5 Jul 2019
Leave to bring a second appeal was declined because the statutory threshold in s 253(3) was not met: the issues raised were not of general or public importance beyond the applicant's specific circumstances and no miscarriage of justice would occur given the applicant's significant offending history, the High Court's corrective order imposing an interlock, and the appropriateness of the two‑year disqualification.
26 Mar 2019
The sentencing judge erred by failing to apply the totality principle when making cumulative additions to starting points; the appropriate global starting point was reduced to 14 months and, after a 25% guilty plea discount, the correct term of imprisonment is 10.5 months; the two-year disqualification was excessive and reduced to 18 months.
21 Feb 2019
The appeal was dismissed except to correct a clerical error: the sentencing Judge did not err in imposing two cumulative 13‑month periods of disqualification (total 26 months) given the separate timing of the offences, the offender's breach history and risk factors; the sentence was not manifestly excessive and leave to appeal out of time was granted for valid reasons.