Taimoor Rana is seasoned criminal defense attorney specializing in DUI related cases. He shares his expert legal opinion here « Understanding Search and Seizure Law: What if a Search Violates the Fourth Amendment?
0
- Here I am explaining you that in case if the search violates the fourth amendment than what could happen.
The Exclusionary Rule.
If, upon review, it has been found by the court that an unreasonable search has been occurred, then any evidence seized as a result of that search could not be allowed by the court to use as direct evidence against the defendant in a criminal prosecution, state or federal. This rule has been established by the U.S. Supreme Court in 1961and it has come to be known as the “exclusionary rule.”
After this day, the exclusionary rule has been criticized by many commentators on the basis that it unfairly lets the criminal go free just because the constable has erred. But the supporter of the rule argued that excluding illegally seized evidence is necessary to restrict police from conducting illegal searches. According to this deterrence argument, if the resulting evidence can’t be used to convict the defendant then the improper searches won’t be conducted by police.
Fruit of the Poisonous Tree Doctrine.
Under a legal rule that is colorfully known as the “fruit of the poisonous tree” doctrine, in addition to being excluded as evidence against the defendant, is there is evidence that has been resulted from an illegal search then it may not be used to discover other evidence.
The meaning of “tree” here is the evidence that the police illegally seize in the first place; whereas the “fruit” is the second-generation product of the evidence that is illegally seized. Both tree and fruit are not allowed to be presented as evidence at trial.
Example
Hy Lowe has been arrested by the officer Wiley for selling phony telephone cards. A judge rules that Officer Wiley has an illegal entrance in Lowe’s home and he has improperly seized a map that showed the location where the phone cards had been hidden by Lowe. Then Officer Wiley found the phone cards in the same location as indicated in the map. Since that map has been located by officer Wiley through an illegal search, the phone cards are the fruit of that unlawful search and so therefore they are also inadmissible into evidence.
It is believed by some defendants that if they get success in proving that the search was illegal, then the case must be dismissed. No it is not true. If a prosecutor has got enough other evidence to prove that the defendant is guilty, then the case can continue.
Illegally-Seized Evidence
Also, the illegally-seized evidence can be:
• Taken into consideration by the judge when deciding on an appropriate sentence following conviction
• Admissible in civil cases and deportation cases, and
• in some situations they can be used by a prosecutor to attack the credibility of a witness who testifies in the trial.
You might also like
 |
 |
 |
 |
