Close X

Blog

What does "Fruit of the Poisonous Tree" Mean?

Posted by Terry A. Wapner | Feb 12, 2014 | 0 Comments

Have you ever heard the phrase: Fruit of the Poisonous Tree? It can be a head scratcher for many people, but it's an important concept in the area of DUI and criminal defense. Technically, it means that evidence gathered by illegal means must be excluded from trial. How do officers obtain it? Well, it can be gathered in a number of ways, but a common way is through an illegal interrogation.

The case that developed the fruit of the poisonous tree concept was Wong Sun v. United States (1963). In this case, the prosecution introduced drugs into evidence. However, the only reason federal officers had learned about these drugs was through a witness that was only identified when the defendant made a statement during an unlawful arrest.

This was a U.S. Supreme Court case and the Court ruled that any and all evidence obtained as a result of the unlawful arrest was considered fruit of the poisonous tree and must be excluded.

The fruit of the poisonous tree concept goes back to the Exclusionary Rule. This rule is available to the defendant in a criminal case as a remedy for illegal searches that end up violating the defendant's 4th Amendment rights. The 4th Amendment protects against unreasonable searches and seizures.

In cases where the Exclusionary Rule applies, illegally obtained evidence must be excluded. The fruit of the poisonous tree doctrine goes one step further and says that not only is the original evidence excluded, but so is anything else discovered as a result of the initial, unlawful search.

There are some other, related concepts that go along with the fruit of the poisonous tree doctrine. These include the following:

  • Admissible Evidence: This is the type of evidence that you are probably most familiar with. It is generally straightforward. This is the type of evidence that is allowed during a trial. To be permitted, it must make something more or less probable.
  • Excluded Evidence: This is what I have been talking about in this post. This is evidence that may be relevant and admissible, but cannot be admitted for some reason besides irrelevancy.
  • Good Faith: When the term “good faith” is used in the legal context, it is meant to imply that there was a reasonable, honest belief involved. In addition, there was no malice or bad intent used and no intent to defraud. Good faith is usually considered in light of all the facts and is used in a case-by-case basis.

When talking about the fruit of the poisonous tree doctrine, one must keep in mind that there are three exceptions to the rule. In the following three situations, evidence will not be excluded, even though it had been obtained unlawfully:

  • If the evidence was discovered from a source independent of the illegal act;
  • If discovery of the evidence was inevitable; or
  • If there is attenuation between the illegal activity and the discovery of the evidence.

Criminal charges are never simple. The legal paperwork involved is nothing short of a nightmare for most people. You don't have to fight your charges on your own! I have helped many people in the Fresno area defend DUI and other alcohol-related charges and I can help you, too!

About the Author

Terry A. Wapner

Terry A. Wapner confines his practice to the defense of persons accused of driving under the influence of alcohol and/or drugs, and related crimes.

Comments

There are no comments for this post. Be the first and Add your Comment below.

Leave a Comment

What Happens Now?

Roadside arrest

It’s a frightening situation. You are arrested for DUI after submitting to a breathalyzer and participating in a couple of field sobriety tests. The officer confiscated your driver’s license and provided you with a temporary license. You were given a notice to appear in court in a few weeks. Now what? Fresno DUI attorney, Terry A. Wapner, can help you make sense of this situation, guide you through the process, and might be able to provide the defense that results in finding you Not Guilty!

Myths & Truths About DUI Charges

Dui1

Myth: “There is nothing that a Fresno DUI defense lawyer can do.” Truth: Absolutely not true. Over the past 7-10 years, the conviction rate in California for DUI's is only around 70 percent. That means that 30 percent of the charges are being reduced to charges that are less than a DUI charge or not guilty verdicts are being returned. I have the ability and have won Fresno DUI cases. Do not give in to despair and believe that you are destined to lose. Entering a guilty plea to a DUI charge when the evidence against you can be challenged may result in an expensive mistake that could haunt you in the long run.