Facing criminal charges is a significant experience in a person’s life. It’s one that must be taken seriously, which means taking the time to explore every possible defense strategy. In some cases, calling the state’s evidence into question is one component of that strategy.
In criminal cases, there’s a concept known as the “fruit of the poisonous tree” that sometimes applies to evidence. This is an extension of the exclusionary rule, which prevents evidence from being used if it was obtained during a violation of the defendant’s constitutional rights. This concept can deter police misconduct and strengthen defendant’s rights.
What’s a poisonous tree?
The poisonous tree is an initial illegal act that taints evidence obtained while that act was being committed. Illegal searches, Miranda rights violations and unlawful arrests are all examples of a poisonous tree.
The fruit of the poisonous tree goes a step beyond the illegal act. Instead, it applies to the evidence that’s seized because of it. The entire chain of evidence would be tainted because the initial act was unlawful.
While the fruit of the poisonous tree is applicable in many cases, there are limited times in which it won’t apply. These include:
- Independent sources: Evidence obtained from a wholly separate legal source
- Inevitable discovery: Evidence would have been obtained by lawful means even if the illegal action was never committed
- Attenuation doctrine: The link between the illegal act and the evidence is so remote that it isn’t actually tainted
Proving that evidence should fall under the fruit of the poisonous tree concept can be challenging to include if you need to present a defense strategy. It may be beneficial to work with someone who understands these matters so they can help you to determine how to proceed.
