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.
Justice Felix Frankfurter coined the specific phrase "fruit of the poisonous tree" in the 1939 case Nardone v. United States .
The principle is an extension of the , which bars direct evidence obtained through Fourth Amendment violations. 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
The 1963 case Wong Sun v. United States clarified that evidence is only suppressed if it was obtained by "exploitation of that illegality" rather than through a separate, clean path. 3. Key Exceptions If police perform an illegal traffic stop and
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
The evidence was also discovered through a separate, legal source completely unrelated to the illegal action. United States
The Supreme Court first established the principle in Silverthorne Lumber Co. v. United States (1920).