Also known as: purge the taint · purging the taint · purges the taint · taint purged
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
An independent-source rule under which an in-court identification is admissible despite an earlier unconstitutional pretrial identification when the witness's observations at the time of the crime supply a basis independent of the illegality. Courts examine the witness's opportunity to view the perpetrator, degree of attention, accuracy of any prior description, level of certainty at the confrontation, and time elapsed between the crime and the confrontation. When these factors demonstrate that the in-court identification rests on the witness's independent recollection rather than the tainted lineup, the taint is purged and the testimony is received.
Preston Pratt was shown to a witness in a suggestive stationhouse lineup without counsel. At trial the witness identified Pratt in court. The court applied the five-factor test and found the identification admissible because the witness had a clear view during the robbery, paid close attention, gave an accurate description beforehand, showed high certainty at the lineup, and only two hours had passed since the crime.
Pedro Pacheco made statements during an unlawful detention at a factory. Two days later he returned voluntarily with counsel, received Miranda warnings, and signed a detailed confession. The court held the confession admissible because the passage of time, his release, and his counseled voluntary appearance constituted intervening circumstances that purged the taint of the initial detention.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
Patricia Patel was stopped without reasonable suspicion while waiting in a loading zone. Officers discovered a preexisting valid warrant for unpaid tickets, arrested her, and found illegal firearms during an inventory search. The court admitted the firearms because the valid warrant was an intervening circumstance that broke the causal chain from the unlawful stop.
Pierre Poulin was arrested without probable cause and made incriminating statements less than two hours later. No significant intervening event occurred between the arrest and the statements. The court suppressed the statements because the close temporal proximity and absence of any break in the causal chain left the taint un-purged.
Piper Patel was in custody and gave a statement after police failed to inform her that her attorney had called. The court admitted the statement because events unknown to the suspect and occurring outside her presence had no bearing on whether her waiver was knowing and voluntary, so the taint from any prior violation was purged.
Pilar Pena's home was entered without knocking and announcing despite officers holding a valid search warrant. The court admitted the evidence found inside because the violation of the knock-and-announce rule did not require suppression when the warrant itself supplied an independent and lawful basis for the search.
Courts examine temporal proximity between the illegality and the evidence, the presence of intervening circumstances such as voluntary returns with counsel or valid preexisting warrants, and the purpose and flagrancy of the police misconduct. When these factors show that later evidence resulted from an independent act of free will, the taint is purged and the evidence is admissible.
Supporting sources
A valid preexisting warrant is a strong intervening circumstance that often supports attenuation, but courts still weigh it against temporal proximity and the flagrancy of the misconduct. When the officer's conduct is merely negligent and the warrant is unrelated to the stop, the taint is usually purged and evidence found during the subsequent arrest is admissible.
Supporting sources
Yes, when sufficient time has passed, the suspect has been released, and the suspect returns voluntarily with counsel or after proper warnings, the confession is treated as an act of free will that breaks the causal chain. Evidence discovered through that attenuated confession is then admissible.
Supporting sources
…of any taint' arising from the entry"). As noted, there is no such independent event, or intervening chain of events that would purge the taint of the illegal entry, present here. See supra , at 618. The search that produced the relevant evidence here is the very search that the knock-and-announce violation rendered unlawful.…