Hickey v Chief Executive Officer of Customs; Hickey v Commissioner of Police

The appellant, Mr Hickey, was convicted and sentenced by a Magistrate for the importation of prohibited items into Australia on two separate occasions, as well as making false declarations on his incoming passenger card. The appellant appealed against both his conviction and the sentence imposed by the Magistrate. The appeal against the conviction was dismissed, while the appeal against the sentence was allowed. Mr Hickey's contention was that the sentence was manifestly excessive and that the Magistrate had erred in exercising their discretion. The court considered the principles of sentencing and the circumstances of the case, including the nature of the offences, the appellant's previous criminal history, and the need for general deterrence.

The court found that the Magistrate had not erred in their exercise of sentencing discretion, but that the sentences imposed were manifestly excessive. The court considered that the appropriate sentence for the 2010 offences was a global fine of $5,000 and for the 2013 offences was a global fine of $6,000. The court emphasised the importance of proportionality in sentencing and the need to balance the various considerations that inform the sentencing process. The court also noted that the appellant had shown remorse and had cooperated with the authorities throughout the investigation and trial. The appeal against the costs order made by the Magistrate was dismissed.