Also known as: attenuation
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
A doctrine in criminal procedure that permits the admission of evidence obtained following unconstitutional police conduct when the connection between the illegality and the evidence is sufficiently remote or interrupted by intervening circumstances.
Officer Lewis stopped Abigail Alvarez in a parking lot without reasonable suspicion after seeing her carry a duffel bag. Dispatch then reported an outstanding warrant for a missed child-support hearing unrelated to the stop. Lewis arrested Alvarez on the warrant and found methamphetamine in her car during a search incident to arrest. The valid warrant broke the causal chain from the illegal stop.
Anthony Arnold was stopped without suspicion during a routine patrol. The officer learned of a preexisting arrest warrant for an unrelated matter and arrested Arnold. Drugs found on Arnold during the lawful arrest were admissible because the warrant served as an intervening circumstance that dissipated any taint from the initial stop.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
Police entered Alexandra Armstrong's home to execute a valid search warrant but failed to knock and announce. Officers discovered a gun and drugs inside. The violation did not require suppression because the evidence would have been found regardless and the misconduct was not flagrant.
Aaron Adams gave an initial statement during a technical Miranda violation. After proper warnings he provided a second statement that was voluntary. The later statement was admissible because the surrounding circumstances showed the taint from the first encounter had dissipated.
Ariana Azizi was arrested without probable cause and later confessed after receiving Miranda warnings. Several hours passed and she spoke with friends. The confession remained inadmissible because the causal chain from the illegal arrest was not broken by the warnings or passage of time.
Officers entered Alexis Archer's apartment without a warrant and arrested him. They later obtained a statement at the station. The statement was admissible because the arrest inside the home did not taint evidence obtained through an independent lawful process outside the residence.
Courts examine the temporal proximity between the illegality and the evidence, the presence of intervening circumstances, and the purpose and flagrancy of the official misconduct. Purposeful or flagrant misconduct weighs strongly against admissibility.
Supporting sources
Discovery of a valid preexisting warrant unconnected to the stop constitutes a strong intervening circumstance that can attenuate the taint when the officer's conduct was at most negligent rather than purposeful or flagrant.
Supporting sources
Repeated Miranda warnings, passage of time, and consultation with friends are ordinarily insufficient to break the causal chain when the confession is the direct result of the unlawful arrest.
Supporting sources
…n. 21 (1969); Linkletter v. Walker , 381 U. S. 618, 636-637 (1965). Cf. Fuller v. Alaska , 393 U. S. 80, 81 (1968). The "attenuation-of-the-taint" doctrine also is consistent with the balancing approach. See Brown v. Illinois , 422 U. S. 590 (1975); Wong Sun v. United States , 371 U. S., at 491-492; Amsterdam,…