Fruit Of The Poisonous Tree Doctrine

1,737 Florida cases classified under this topic · sorted by citation count · see the citation graph · browse and sort

• United States v. O'Connor
  658 F.2d 688· 9th Cir.· 1981-10-05 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the agents had probable cause to seize the briefcase and that the subsequent search pursuant to a warrant was lawful, reversing the district court's suppression order.
• United States v. Prichard
  645 F.2d 854· 10th Cir.· 1981-04-01 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the roadblock stop and subsequent search of the vehicle were lawful, and the evidence seized was admissible.
• United States v. Avance R. Allen
  629 F.2d 51· D.C. Cir.· 1980-05-27 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the arresting officer lacked probable cause to arrest the appellant for drinking in public because he failed to conduct a minimal inquiry into whether drinking was permitted at the establishment.
• United States v. Lindoine Sanchez-Jaramillo
  637 F.2d 1094· 7th Cir.· 1980-04-22 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the warrantless search of Cruz's suitcases violated his Fourth Amendment rights because his consent was tainted by an illegal detention, but Sanchez's consent to search his apartment was voluntary.
• United States v. Wilson
  569 F.2d 392· 5th Cir.· 1978-03-13 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the district court erred by not determining whether the evidence obtained after an illegal arrest was sufficiently attenuated from the primary illegality to be admissible.
• United States v. Hall
  557 F.2d 1114· 5th Cir.· 1977-08-18 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the police had probable cause to search the vehicle based on reasonable suspicion that developed into probable cause during an investigative stop.
• Lower v. State
  348 So. 2d 410· Fla. 2d DCA· 1977-07-27 ·cited 22×
  Richard Ray Lower, a passenger in a stopped vehicle, challenges the validity of his arrest for marijuana possession following a warrantless search. The court holds that the initial traffic stop lacked any founded or reasonable suspicion to justify it, making the evidence obtained
• United States v. Frazier
  545 F.2d 71· 8th Cir.· 1976-12-01 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the district court did not err in denying the motion to suppress evidence seized from the rented automobile, nor in denying the motion for acquittal based on variance or insufficiency of evidence.
• United States v. Bruno Anthony Piet and Delmar L. Markham
  498 F.2d 178· 7th Cir.· 1974-05-20 ·cited 22×
  The court affirmed the jury convictions, holding that the indictment was sufficient, evidence supported possession, the motion to suppress was properly denied, and there was no evidence of a perjured witness due to an undisclosed plea bargain.
• United States v. de la Vega
  489 F.2d 761· 2d Cir.· 1974-01-09 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the appellant lacked standing to object to the wiretap evidence and that the government sufficiently proved an independent source for its tax investigation, thus affirming the conviction.
• United States v. Olsen
  487 F.2d 77· 8th Cir.· 1973-11-06 ·cited 22×
  The admission of a prior conviction for a similar offense to show knowledge, and the admission of testimony about a pistol unrelated to the crime charged, were not reversible error.
• United States v. Hal Findley Moore
  483 F.2d 1361· 9th Cir.· 1973-08-30 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the search of the appellant's luggage violated his Fourth Amendment rights, requiring reversal of the drug possession conviction, but affirmed the conviction for assaulting an officer, as the arrest was lawful despite being based on evidence from an unlawful s
• Gissendanner v. Louie L. Wainwright
  482 F.2d 1293· 5th Cir.· 1973-07-17 ·cited 22×
  The court held that petitioners lacked standing to challenge a suppressed confession that was not used against them, and that their identification was not the fruit of that confession. The court also found that other claims lacked merit or did not rise to constitutional dimension
• United States v. Valen
  479 F.2d 467· 3d Cir.· 1973-05-22 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the exigent circumstances doctrine justified both the warrantless seizure of the appellant's suitcase and the warrantless search of its contents.
• United States v. Hull
  437 F.2d 1· 5th Cir.· 1971-01-12 ·cited 22×
  The court held that evidence derived from an independent, lawful source, unrelated to an illegal search, was admissible, and that the government sufficiently proved the elements of transporting a stolen vehicle.
• United States v. Case
  435 F.2d 766· 7th Cir.· 1970-11-25 ·cited 22×
  The dissent argues that the agents' entry into the hallway and subsequent seizure of evidence were lawful, and the suppression order should be reversed.
• Allen v. Hoyt C. Cupp
  426 F.2d 756· 9th Cir.· 1970-04-30 ·cited 22×
  A confession is not a product of an illegal arrest if the police did not exploit the illegal arrest and the confession was obtained through means sufficiently distinguishable from the illegal detention.
• Ashby v. State
  228 So. 2d 400· Fla. 2d DCA· 1969-11-07 ·cited 22×
  Two defendants appealed their convictions for grand larceny after pleading nolo contendere, challenging the trial court's denial of their motion to suppress evidence obtained through an illegal search and seizure. The court reversed and remanded, holding that the warrantless sear
• Mapys v. United States
  409 F.2d 964· 10th Cir.· 1969-04-25 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the appellant's identification of the stolen automobile and his subsequent unsolicited statements were voluntary and not the product of an illegal confession, thus admissible.
• United States ex rel. Rudolph Boyance v. Myers
  398 F.2d 896· 3d Cir.· 1968-07-29 ·cited 22×
  A nighttime search of an occupied home, even with a warrant explicitly limited to daytime, is constitutionally unreasonable under the Fourth Amendment.
• Buick v. United States
  396 F.2d 912· 9th Cir.· 1968-06-12 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in denying a mistrial for a sequestration order violation, admitting evidence seized during a lawful stop and arrest, or admitting testimony based on a pre-Wade Act lineup identification.
• Theobald v. United States
  371 F.2d 769· 9th Cir.· 1967-01-19 ·cited 22×
  The court held that testimony regarding prior drug sales and evidence seized during a lawful search incident to arrest were admissible.
• United States v. Remington
  208 F.2d 567· 2d Cir.· 1953-11-24 ·cited 22×
  Perjury committed during a trial under an allegedly illegal indictment is a separate crime and can be prosecuted, even if the prior indictment was procured by government misconduct.
• Frierson v. State
  851 So. 2d 293· Fla. 4th DCA· 2003-08-06 ·cited 21×
  Frierson was stopped for failing to signal a left turn and driving with a cracked taillight lens, despite no other vehicle being affected and the taillight functioning properly. Although an arrest warrant issued from an earlier incident (where an imposter had used Frierson's iden
• Baez v. State
  814 So. 2d 1149· Fla. 4th DCA· 2002-04-10 ·cited 21×
  The court held that when a police officer retains a driver's license and runs a warrant check during an encounter initially consensual, the encounter becomes a seizure, and a reasonable person would not feel free to leave without their identification. The cocaine found following
• Smith v. State
  778 So. 2d 329· Fla. 2d DCA· 2000-12-29 ·cited 21×
  Reginald Smith was arrested for trespassing in a convenience store parking lot, and drugs were discovered during a search incident to arrest. The court reversed, holding that the arrest was illegal because Smith had been impliedly invited onto the quasi-public property and receiv
• State v. Hernandez
  718 So. 2d 833· Fla. 3d DCA· 1998-08-05 ·cited 21×
  The State appealed the suppression of a firearm seized from a rental car in which Hernandez was a passenger. The court reversed, holding that because the police lawfully stopped the car for a traffic violation and Hernandez disclaimed any ownership or possessory interest in the v
• United States v. Rusher
  966 F.2d 868· 4th Cir.· 1992-06-03 ·cited 21×
  The court must decide whether an investigatory stop can be unreasonable under the Fourth Amendment due to an officer's subjective intent, as the majority misapplied the subjective standard.
• Leodis Dortch v. O'Leary
  863 F.2d 1337· 7th Cir.· 1988-12-13 ·cited 21×
  The court held that federal habeas review of the Fourth Amendment claim was barred by Stone v. Powell because the state courts provided a full and fair opportunity to litigate the issue. The court also held that the prosecutor's comments on the defendant's silence, while improper
• United States v. Johnson
  816 F.2d 918· 3d Cir.· 1987-04-24 ·cited 21×
  The court held that the subsequent valid confession rendered any prior Miranda violation harmless error, and the late disclosure of exculpatory evidence did not violate Brady. However, the sentence was vacated due to insufficient factual findings regarding restitution.
• United States v. Mitchell
  812 F.2d 1250· 9th Cir.· 1987-03-19 ·cited 21×
  The court held that a crime committed during an illegal detention is prosecutable, and the exclusionary rule does not bar prosecution of the crime itself. The court also affirmed that the objective standard applies to determining whether a statement constitutes a true threat unde
• Reed Wayne Hamilton v. Crispus NIX
  809 F.2d 463· 8th Cir.· 1987-01-12 ·cited 21×
  The court held that the testimony of witnesses discovered through lawful means, even if obtained after police misconduct, is admissible under the independent source doctrine. The admission of marijuana was error but harmless, and prosecutorial remarks did not render the trial fun
• United States v. Beck
  729 F.2d 1329· 11th Cir.· 1984-04-16 ·cited 21×
  The court held that Beck's Speedy Trial Act rights were not violated, the running shoes were admissible under the good faith exception, the polygraph results were correctly excluded, and his confession was voluntary and not the fruit of an illegal arrest.
• Satchell v. Cardwell
  653 F.2d 408· 9th Cir.· 1981-08-10 ·cited 21×
  The court held that the petitioner's Sixth Amendment right to effective assistance of counsel was not violated by his attorney's failure to file a motion to suppress evidence, as the attorney's actions were within the bounds of reasonably competent representation and the entry wa
• Britton v. State
  336 So. 2d 663· Fla. 1st DCA· 1976-08-31 ·cited 21×
  The Florida District Court of Appeal held that the smell of marijuana emanating from a home does not, by itself, constitute probable cause to arrest the occupants. The court distinguished this case from a prior ruling involving a car, emphasizing the greater expectation of privac
• United States v. Miles
  468 F.2d 482· 3d Cir.· 1972-09-29 ·cited 21×
  The court affirmed the conviction, holding that the arrest and seizure of evidence were lawful due to probable cause, the jury instruction on possession of recently stolen property did not violate the Fifth Amendment, and the evidence of flight was admissible.
• United States v. Dontiez Pendergrass
  995 F.3d 858· 11th Cir.· 2021-04-22 ·cited 20×
  Dontiez Pendergrass was convicted of five counts of armed robbery and related firearm charges after law enforcement identified him as the perpetrator of a series of robberies in Georgia through distinctive patterns of evidence, including surveillance videos showing a left-handed
• Peterson v. State
  649 So. 2d 326· Fla. 1st DCA· 1995-01-26 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the search of the defendant's pockets exceeded the scope of the consent given and the pat-down, rendering the seized evidence inadmissible as fruit of the poisonous tree.
• United States v. Lasanta
  978 F.2d 1300· 2d Cir.· 1992-10-21 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the warrantless seizure of a vehicle for civil forfeiture, without probable cause or a warrant, violates the Fourth Amendment, but the admission of evidence derived from such seizure can be harmless error. The court also held that evidence of prior drug transa
• United States v. Sitton
  968 F.2d 947· 9th Cir.· 1992-07-02 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the district court erred in refusing to instruct the jury on the lesser included offense of simple possession for Dewbre and Sitton. The court also affirmed other convictions and evidentiary rulings.
• Harris v. State
  574 So. 2d 243· Fla. 1st DCA· 1991-01-31 ·cited 20×
  The court held that a routine safety frisk without reasonable suspicion of being armed is constitutionally impermissible, and evidence derived from such a frisk should be suppressed.
• United States v. Millan
  912 F.2d 1014· 8th Cir.· 1990-08-31 ·cited 20×
  The dissent argues that the majority erred by not applying the Leon good faith exception to cure the taint of evidence obtained during an invalid detention, and that reasonable suspicion existed for the initial stop.
• Hill v. Black
  887 F.2d 513· 5th Cir.· 1989-10-10 ·cited 20×
  The Fifth Circuit reversed the district court's conditional grant of habeas corpus relief regarding sentencing, finding the Mississippi contemporaneous objection rule was properly applied and that jury instructions were constitutional. The court affirmed the denial of the writ co
• United States v. Wanless
  882 F.2d 1459· 9th Cir.· 1989-08-23 ·cited 20×
  The court should have applied federal law, not state law, to determine the admissibility of evidence seized during an inventory search. Federal law does not require owner consent for such searches if conducted according to standard procedures.
• State v. Ruiz
  526 So. 2d 170· Fla. 3d DCA· 1988-05-31 ·cited 20×
  Florida appealed the suppression of a gun and cocaine found during a narcotics investigation, arguing that the officer's questioning of Ruiz about a firearm did not require Miranda warnings because it occurred during a Terry stop rather than a custodial arrest. The appellate cour
• United States v. Galberth
  846 F.2d 983· 5th Cir.· 1988-05-26 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the defendant voluntarily consented to the warrantless search of her person, and this consent was not tainted by any prior illegal seizure.
• United States v. $25
  845 F.2d 857· 9th Cir.· 1988-04-28 ·cited 20×
  The court should have remanded to determine if the initial investigatory stop was coercive, as the majority's conclusion that the suspect felt free to leave was unsupported by the record and the circumstances.
• United States v. Townsley
  843 F.2d 1070· 8th Cir.· 1988-03-25 ·cited 20×
  White defendants cannot join in a black co-defendant's Batson challenge based on the exclusion of black jurors, as they lack standing and did not suffer prejudice.
• Morris v. State
  519 So. 2d 706· Fla. 2d DCA· 1988-02-03 ·cited 20×
  Dexter Morris was arrested for cocaine and marijuana possession after officers stopped him in a high-crime area without founded suspicion and discovered contraband during a pat-down search. The court reversed his conviction, holding that the initial detention was unconstitutional
• United States v. Howard
  828 F.2d 552· 9th Cir.· 1987-09-21 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the warrantless entry into Angel's residence lacked probable cause, rendering any subsequent consent to search invalid as fruit of the poisonous tree.