Nix v. Williams 467 U.S. 431 (1984)

• Author: Leonard W. Levy
• Pages: 1815

Page 1815

A 7?2 Supreme Court held that although an accused's incriminating statements could not be admitted as EVIDENCE because police had interrogated him in violation of his RIGHT TO COUNSEL, physical evidence discovered on the basis of his incriminating statements could be introduced against him if the prosecution, by a preponderance of proof, could show that such evidence would inevitably have been discovered even in the absence of accused's statements. The case produced an "inevitable discovery" exception to the EXCLUSIONARY RULE : any FRUIT OF THE POISONOUS TREE may be used as evidence if it would have been inevitably or ultimately discovered, just as if it had been discovered on the basis of independent or uncontaminated leads.

(See BREWER V....