A VIOLENT Woodford prisoner has lost his fight for an early taste of freedom.
Mitchell John Trimble asked the Court of Appeal to overturn a Southern Queensland Regional Parole Board decision to keep him behind bars.
The court dismissed the 21-year-old's application last week and ordered him to pay costs.
Trimble pleaded guilty on November, 21, 2012, to burglary and robbery with violence after he and a mate - one armed with a crowbar, the other with a hammer - broke into the home of a person known to Trimble.
He was on probation at the time and was jailed for three years and was paroled on May 3, 2013.
In September of the same year, Trimble and two others punched, threatened to stab and robbed a man of $850 outside a Brisbane hotel.
Trimble was subsequently charged with robbery with violence and returned to custody.
His parole was suspended on October 8 and he was eventually sentenced to two years' jail, cumulative with the remainder of the sentence imposed on November 21, 2012.
A parole eligibility date was fixed for August 10 this year while his full-time release date is June 13, 2017.
Shortly after returning to jail he added drug and prison rule breaches to his catalogue of crimes.
Trimble applied for parole on February 10 this year, but the parole board rejected the application for a range of reasons including the risk he posed to the community.
Trimble sent a four-page rebuttal to the board on May 12, saying he was happy to undertake prison and community-based programs including substance abuse courses.
The board again rejected the parole request.
Trimble told the Court of Appeal the parole board did not consider improvements in his behaviour and attitude or the impact early parole could have on his rehabilitation.
"Trimble argued that the board failed to take into account the risk to the community if he is forced to serve the balance of his terms of imprisonment without having undertaken a period of supervision on parole," the Court of Appeal documents state.
Justice Martin Burns rejected Trimble's arguments, saying there was no evidence to "support the proposition that gradual reintegration into the community via a parole order was preferable to Mr Trimble's release at his full-time discharge date and no submission to that effect was made to the board".
"In any event, the board did not decide that Mr Trimble must serve the whole of his terms of imprisonment; rather, the board left the door open to Mr Trimble to make another application for parole which, if successful, will result in his release well prior to his full-time discharge date," Justice Burns said.
- APN NEWSDESK
Update your news preferences and get the latest news delivered to your inbox.