Also known as: fruit of the poisonous tree · fruit of the poisonous tree doctrine · exclusionary rule derivative · poisonous tree doctrine
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
A rule of criminal procedure that extends the exclusionary rule to bar not only evidence obtained directly through a constitutional violation but also evidence later derived from exploitation of that illegality.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
Environmental officer Dana Cruz entered ChemTech's fenced property without a warrant and installed a sampling device in a locked outfall pipe. Using only the data from that device, the agency secured warrants and seized servers and records. ChemTech moved to suppress the seized materials. The court suppressed them because the warrants rested entirely on information obtained through the initial unlawful intrusion.
Agent Perez hacked Malik's home server without a warrant and viewed IP logs. Perez then used those logs to obtain warrants for NimbusCloud records and emails. Malik moved to suppress both the logs and the later materials. The court excluded all of them because the warrants were derived directly from the initial unlawful search.
Federal agents installed a warrantless tracking program on Alan's home computer that logged IP addresses and access patterns. Relying primarily on that data, agents obtained a warrant for Alan's cloud account and found stolen files. Alan moved to suppress the cloud evidence. The court suppressed it because the warrant affidavit rested on the product of the unlawful surveillance.
Officers broke into Bonnie's apartment without a warrant, seized her laptop, and detained her. Three days later they obtained server credentials from her during a voluntary interview and used them to retrieve chat logs. Bonnie moved to suppress the logs. The court admitted them after finding the voluntary disclosure sufficiently attenuated the taint of the initial entry.
Investigators pressured bank IT staff to search Glenn's work email without a warrant and obtained messages showing receipt of inside information. They included those messages in an affidavit that also summarized independent surveillance data and obtained a warrant for Glenn's home. Glenn moved to suppress the home evidence. The court denied suppression because the preexisting surveillance and tip supplied an independent basis for the warrant.
Officers conducted an unlawful search of a third party's premises and obtained records that later led to evidence against Alderman. Alderman moved to suppress the derivative evidence. The court denied the motion because Alderman lacked standing to challenge the initial search that produced the taint.
A later warrant does not automatically purge the taint. Suppression is required when the warrant affidavit rests solely or primarily on information obtained through the initial constitutional violation and no independent source, inevitable discovery, or attenuation is shown.
Supporting sources
…discovery exception to the exclusionary rule. Williams contends that evidence of the body's location and condition is "fruit of the poisonous tree," i. e. , the "fruit" or product of Detective Leaming's plea to help the child's parents give her "a Christian burial," which this Court had already held equated to interrogation. He…
…entry here could be characterized as a but-for cause of discovering what was inside, we have "never held that evidence is fruit of the poisonous tree' simply because it would not have come to light but for the illegal actions of the police.'" Segura v. United States , 468 U. S. 796, 815 (1984). See also id. , at 829 (Stevens, J.,…
…so attenuated as to dissipate the taint." Nardone v. United States , 308 U. S. 338, 341. We need not hold that all evidence is "fruit of the poisonous tree" simply because it would not have come to light but for the illegal actions of the police. Rather, the more apt question in such a case is "whether, granting establishment of the primary…
…by police conduct which overcame his will to resist," id. , at 654.) The next year, the Court again declined to apply the "fruit of the poisonous tree"
…In its initial opinion, the Arizona Supreme Court had determined that the second confession, to Donna Sarivola, was not the "fruit of the poisonous tree
Yes. When officers exceed the permissible scope and duration of a reasonable-suspicion detention of luggage, any evidence derived from that prolonged seizure is subject to suppression as fruit of the poisonous tree.
Supporting sources
Abandoned property is not suppressible if no seizure occurred before the abandonment. A mere show of authority that the suspect ignores does not constitute a seizure, so property discarded while fleeing remains admissible.
Supporting sources
Evidence is admissible under the independent source doctrine when it is discovered through a source wholly separate from the illegal conduct, even if officers later engaged in misconduct. The prior untainted information must be sufficient by itself to support a warrant or other lawful discovery.
Supporting sources
Courts examine the temporal proximity between the illegality and the discovery of the evidence, the presence of intervening circumstances such as a voluntary act of free will, and the flagrancy of the official misconduct.
Supporting sources