Section 9.41 Fruits of the Poisonous Tree and Purging the Taint

• Library: Criminal Practice 2012 Supp

3. (§9.41) Fruits of the Poisonous Tree and Purging the Taint

A final issue relating to the application of the exclusionary rule relates to the circumstances under which evidence derivative of a Fourth Amendment violation must be excluded as fruits of the poisonous tree. State v. Miller, 894 S.W.2d 649, 654 (Mo. banc 1995). The Court in Miller noted that there is “no steadfast rule” requiring exclusion of fruits; rather:

[I]n determining whether the exclusionary rule should apply to render evidence inadmissible as “fruit of the poisonous tree,” the question is “whether, granting establishment of the primary illegality, the evidence to which . . . objection is made has been come at by exploitation of the illegality or instead by means sufficiently distinguishable to be purged of the primary taint.”

Id. (quoting State v. Lingar, 726 S.W.2d 728 (Mo. banc 1987), and Wong Sun v. United States, 371 U.S. 471, 488 (1963)). The preliminary question is whether the evidence sought to be suppressed is a fruit of the illegal conduct in the first place. SeeState v. Mosby, 94 S.W.3d 410, 419 (Mo. App. W.D. 2003) (evidence “did not derive” from illegal...