The Exclusionary Rule Flashcards
What is the exclusionary Rule ?
Fruit of the Poisonous Tree Doctrine
- If a D’s const. rights (4th, 5th, 6th Amend. Rights) are violated in connection w/ a crim. prosecution
- Doctrine requires the exclusion of all evidence obtained in violation of the rights
- Gov’t must est. admissibility of ev. by a preponderance of the evidence
What does the exclusionary rule apply to ?
- Evidence initially seized as a result of the primary gov’t illegality and
- Secondary derivitive evidence discoverd as a result of the primary taint (fruit of the poisonous tree)
What is the effect of the Exclusionary Rule?
D who has 4th amend. standing may invoke the exclusionary Rule to prohibit the gov’t from introducing evidence obtained as a direct or derivative result of an unreasonable search & seizure
What is the fruit of the poisonous tree?
Any additional evidence derived from an initial illegality, is tainted fruit & thus suppressible
4th Amendment
Evidence seized during an unlawful search can’t constitute proof against the victim of the search
Who resolves suppression issues?
Judge resolves suppression issues raised by pretrial motion to suppress
- On appeal, Std. of review for the judge’s rulings for:
- Questions of law - reviewed de novo
- Factual findings - reviewed only for clear error
Standing
D can only assert the ER to bar evidence obtained in violation of her own const. rights
- Confessions - Onlt the D who made an illegaly obtained confession has standing
- Search & Seizure - Only the D who had her legitimate expectation of privacy violated has Standing
In what circumstances is the Exclusionary Rule Inapplicable?
- Civil Cases
- Deportation Hearings
- Parole Revocation Proceedings
- Grand Jury Proceedings
Exceptions to the Exclusionary Rule?
- Purged Taint Exception
- Miranda Violations don’t exclude phys. fruits
- Admissible to Impeach D’s Testimony
- Good Faith Defense
- Knock & Announce Violation
Purged Taint Exception
If enough additional factors intervene b/w the orig. illegality & the final discovery of the evidence, the evidence may still be admissible
- Intervening Act of Defendant’s Free Will
- Independent Source Rule
- Inevitable Discovery
Intervening Act of Defendant’s Free Will
Will break the chain & purge the taint of the orig. const. violation
- BUT a vol. confession given while in custody immed. following the unconst. arrest will not be admiss. even if given after Miranda Warnings
Independent Source Rule
If the evidence was obtained by a source indep. of the orig. const. viol., the evidence will not be excluded
- i.e. police have 2 sources leading to the same ev. but only one that violates the D’s Const. rights
Inevitable Discovery
Evidence will not be excluded if:
- It would have been inevitably disc. by other investigative tech.
- Even w/out the orig. unconst. obtained info.
Admissible to Impeach Defendant’s Testimony
- Evidence obtained in viol. of D’s const. rights is admiss. to impeach the D’s trial test. when:
- D takes the stand AND
- testifies in manner inconsistent with such unconst. obtained ev.
- Conf. in Viol. of Miranda Rights
- Vol. Conf. admiss. to impeach
- Coerced Conf. NOT admiss. for any purpose
- Ev. obtained by Illegal search admiss. (only accused can be impeached this way)
Good Faith Defense
Exclusionary Rule doesn’t apply if police relied in GF on a:
- judicial opinion, statute/ord., defective search warrant
- If there is no PC, such that no reas. officer would have relied upon it, Can’t be a GF defense
