Middleton v The Queen

Middleton appealed his conviction for armed robbery to the High Court of Australia. The central issue on appeal concerned the admissibility of evidence obtained from the appellant's body, specifically a bullet recovered from his thigh. The prosecution sought to admit this bullet, arguing it was obtained lawfully and was crucial to proving the appellant's involvement in the robbery.

The High Court was required to determine whether the recovery of the bullet from the appellant's body constituted an unlawful search or seizure at common law, and consequently, whether the evidence should have been excluded. This involved considering the scope of police powers to conduct searches of a person's body and the principles governing the admission of illegally or improperly obtained evidence.

The Court held that the recovery of the bullet, which had been surgically removed from the appellant's thigh, did not constitute an unlawful search or seizure at common law. Gleeson CJ and McHugh J reasoned that the common law did not prohibit the removal of a bullet from a person's body, particularly when it was done for medical reasons and was not a result of a physical intrusion by police. They distinguished this situation from cases involving invasive searches conducted by police. The Court affirmed that the admissibility of improperly obtained evidence is a matter for the trial judge's discretion, balancing the probative value of the evidence against its prejudicial effect. In this instance, the evidence was deemed admissible.