The link between the illegal act and the evidence is so weak or distant that the "taint" has dissipated.
The initial illegal action taken by law enforcement, such as a search without a warrant or a coerced confession.
The doctrine uses a simple biological analogy to protect constitutional rights: Fruits from a Poisonous Tree
Officers acted in "good faith," such as relying on a search warrant they believed was valid but was later found to be deficient. 4. Practical Example
If the "tree" (the source) is tainted by illegality, all "fruit" (the evidence) growing from it is typically suppressed and cannot be used against a defendant. 2. Legal Origins The link between the illegal act and the
The doctrine is a legal rule that makes evidence inadmissible in court if it was derived from an illegal search, seizure, or interrogation. This guide breaks down the core metaphor, its legal application, and the critical exceptions that allow such evidence back into a trial. 1. The Core Metaphor
If police perform an illegal traffic stop and find a key to a locker, any evidence found inside that locker is "fruit" of the illegal stop. Unless one of the exceptions applies (like proving they were already planning to search that locker), the evidence from the locker will be suppressed in court. Legal Origins The doctrine is a legal rule
fruit of the poisonous tree | Wex | US Law | LII / Legal Information Institute