Section 11.24 Fruits of the Poisonous Tree

• Library: Criminal Practice 2012 Supp

C. (§11.24) Fruits of the Poisonous Tree

Even though a statement is voluntary and complies with Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (1966), it may still be suppressed if it was obtained as the “fruit of the poisonous tree.” This doctrine provides that, when evidence is derived from constitutional violations that fall within the purview of the exclusionary rule, that evidence may be tainted and therefore inadmissible in court. Statements obtained after an illegal arrest or after confrontation with illegally seized evidence may still be admissible, however, if the illegalities are relatively minor factors in producing the statement. Whether a taint exists is determined on the facts of each case, although some guidelines may be derived from the cases discussed below.

In Wong Sun v. United States, 371 U.S. 471 (1963), the Court held that the defendant’s statement was inadmissible when made as the direct result of an unconstitutional entry and arrest. The Court stated that all evidence, either tangible or intangible, that was obtained “so immediately” from acts in violation of the Fourth Amendment constituted the “fruit” of the illegality and, therefore...