Martin v The Queen; The Queen v Martin

The case of *Martin v The Queen* and *The Queen v Martin* concerned appeals to the Court of Appeal of the Supreme Court of the Australian Capital Territory. The appeals arose from a jury verdict and sentence imposed on the applicant, Martin, for murder. Martin appealed against his conviction and sentence, while the Crown appealed against the sentence.

The Court of Appeal was required to determine several grounds of appeal. Martin argued that the trial judge erred in failing to discharge the jury after a witness disclosed that he had met Martin while both were in custody. Further grounds of appeal related to the admission of evidence, including graphic photographs of the deceased, tendency evidence of Martin's prior criminal behaviour, and evidence of the deceased's non-aggressive nature without proper notice. Martin also contended that the admission of listening device evidence was unlawful due to an antecedent unlawful arrest, and that the trial judge provided an inaccurate summary of evidence in jury directions and erred in allowing the Crown to make submissions regarding blood spatter evidence. The Crown's appeal against sentence focused on whether the trial judge adequately considered the objective seriousness of the offence, sentencing practice, the ratio between the head sentence and non-parole period, and the rehabilitative and protective functions of parole.

The Court of Appeal dismissed Martin's appeal against conviction, finding no error in the trial judge's decisions regarding the disclosure in custody, the admission of photographs, tendency evidence, or the listening device evidence. The court also found no error in the jury directions or the Crown's closing submissions. Similarly, the Crown's appeal against sentence was dismissed, with the Court of Appeal concluding that the trial judge had properly considered all relevant factors and sentencing principles. Consequently, both the appeal against conviction and the appeal against sentence were dismissed.