Admissibility of Evidence Following UNCONSTITUTIONAL Search/Seizure/Arrest

Question 1

Federal Exclusionary Rule

Answer 1

Evidence, whether physical or testimonial, that is obtained in violation of a federal statutory or constitutional provision is INADMISSIBLE at trial against the individual whose rights were violated, as is all fruit of the poisonous tree.

Question 2

Exclusionary Rule: Case-in-Chief v. Cross-Examination

Answer 2

Unconstitutionally obtained evidence is excluded from the prosecutor’s case-in-chief ONLY. It may be introduced to impeach Ds testimony on cross.

Question 3

Exclusionary Rule: Grand Jury, Civil Proceedings, Parole Revocation Proceedings

Answer 3

• Exclusionary rule inapplicable to grand juries unless evidence obtained in violation of the federal wiretapping statute
• Exclusionary rule inapplicable to civil proceedings, parole proceedings

Question 4

Exclusionary Rule: Knock & Announce Violations

Answer 4

Failure to comply w/ knock & announce doesn’t require exclusion

Question 5

Exclusionary Rule: Police Error

Answer 5

• to trigger exclusion, erroneous police conduct must be deliberate, reckless, or grossly negligent.
• Exclusionary rule doesn’t apply to evidence erroneously obtained when executing a search warrant, provided an officer’s mistake was reasonable.

Question 6

Fruit of the Poisonous Tree Exceptions

Answer 6

(1) Independent Source- there is a source for the discovery and seizure of the evidence that is distinct from the original illegality [ex- an independent, parallel process initiated by other officers]
(2) Attenuation- the passage of time and intervening events “purge the taint” of the original illegality and restore the Ds free will. [ex- D illegally arrested on Friday night, released on bail saturday, and then on tuesday returns and confesses. Confession admissible]
(3) Inevitable Discovery- where evidence would necessarily have been discovered through lawful means