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

• Sullivan v. United States
  219 F.2d 760· D.C. Cir.· 1955-02-03 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the defendant's predisposition to commit the crime precluded an entrapment defense, and that evidence obtained from a wiretap was not sufficiently tainted to require exclusion.
• Flowers v. State
  755 So. 2d 708· Fla. 4th DCA· 1999-08-04 ·cited 15×
  In a probation revocation proceeding, appellant challenged the denial of his motion to suppress evidence and statements obtained during a police stop and vehicle search. The Fourth District Court of Appeal affirmed, holding that officers had reasonable suspicion to stop appellant
• United States v. Eaton
  890 F.2d 511· 1st Cir.· 1989-11-27 ·cited 15×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the firearm conviction and that the defendant's statements were admissible or their admission was harmless error.
• United States v. Wallace
  889 F.2d 580· 5th Cir.· 1989-11-22 ·cited 15×
  The court held that the seizure of the firearm was constitutional, the statute under which the defendant was convicted is constitutional, and the sentence enhancement was properly applied.
• United States v. Massell
  823 F.2d 1503· 11th Cir.· 1987-08-07 ·cited 15×
  The court held that the denial of the motion to suppress was proper because the appellant had standing and consented to the search, and the search was a lawful border search. The court also held that the denial of the motion to admit the co-defendant's guilty plea and the denial
• United States v. Kroesser
  731 F.2d 1509· 11th Cir.· 1984-05-11 ·cited 15×
• United States v. Jones
  641 F.2d 425· 6th Cir.· 1981-02-12 ·cited 15×
  The court held that the January 21, 1978 search of Sarah Howard's residence was illegal because the police lacked probable cause to believe Earl Jones was present and Sarah Howard's consent was not freely and voluntarily given under the totality of the circumstances.
• Myers v. Rhay
  577 F.2d 504· 9th Cir.· 1978-05-15 ·cited 15×
  The court held that a state prisoner cannot obtain federal habeas corpus relief on the ground that evidence obtained in an unconstitutional search or seizure was introduced at his trial, if the state provided an opportunity for full and fair litigation of the Fourth Amendment cla
• Ellis v. United States
  264 F.2d 372· D.C. Cir.· 1959-02-12 ·cited 15×
• Somer et ux. v. United States
  138 F.2d 790· 2d Cir.· 1943-11-03 ·cited 15×
  The court held that evidence seized from a vehicle and person must be suppressed if the seizure was a direct result of information unlawfully obtained.
• Leroy v. State
  982 So. 2d 1250· Fla. 1st DCA· 2008-06-02 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the initial stop and detention of the appellant was unlawful, rendering his subsequent consent to search involuntary and tainted.
• Evans v. State
  911 So. 2d 796· Fla. 1st DCA· 2005-02-22 ·cited 14×
  Gregory Evans was convicted of possessing child pornography after confessing during a police interview at his home. He appealed the denial of his motion to suppress the confession, arguing officers violated his rights by failing to answer a question about needing counsel and by d
• State v. Duggins
  691 So. 2d 566· Fla. 2d DCA· 1997-04-11 ·cited 14×
  Florida appealed a trial court's suppression of cannabis evidence seized during an unconstitutional pat-down search of Duggins. The appellate court reversed, holding that the inevitable discovery rule applied because the evidence would have been discovered through a valid search
• Mendez v. State
  678 So. 2d 388· Fla. 4th DCA· 1996-07-10 ·cited 14×
  David Mendez appeals his convictions for drug trafficking and related offenses, challenging the trial court's denial of his motion to suppress evidence. The Fourth District Court of Appeal affirmed, holding that the officer lawfully ordered Mendez out of his vehicle based on both
• State v. Polanco
  658 So. 2d 1123· Fla. 3d DCA· 1995-07-26 ·cited 14×
  The State appeals the trial court's order suppressing all statements and physical evidence obtained from a murder suspect. The appellate court reverses in part, holding that the defendant was not in custody during a school interview and remanding for reconsideration of whether an
• United States v. Bloom
  975 F.2d 1447· 10th Cir.· 1992-09-21 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the encounter between law enforcement and the defendant in a private train compartment escalated into an investigative detention when officers asked incriminating questions without advising him he was free to leave. Therefore, statements made during this deten
• United States v. Pinedo-Montoya
  966 F.2d 591· 10th Cir.· 1992-06-05 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the referral to secondary inspection was based on reasonable suspicion and that the moisture content of marijuana should be included in its weight for sentencing purposes.
• United States v. Evans
  937 F.2d 1534· 10th Cir.· 1991-07-08 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the initial encounter was consensual, the pat-down was voluntary, and the subsequent search of the carry-on bag was a lawful inventory search, thus denying the motion to suppress.
• Curry v. State
  576 So. 2d 890· Fla. 2d DCA· 1991-03-22 ·cited 14×
  The court held that evidence discarded by a defendant after an unlawful police stop is inadmissible if the act of discarding the evidence was prompted by or resulted from the illegal detention.
• United States v. Olawale Olamrewaju Oguns
  921 F.2d 442· 2d Cir.· 1990-12-17 ·cited 14×
  The court held that evidence seized from the defendant's apartment was admissible because his consent was voluntary and any taint from a prior illegal entry was dissipated, and that a phone call was admissible as non-hearsay circumstantial evidence.
• United States v. McCRAW
  920 F.2d 224· 4th Cir.· 1990-11-30 ·cited 14×
  The court should not conclude on admissibility without a full record development and proper analysis of attenuation and inevitable discovery doctrines.
• Tukes v. Dugger
  911 F.2d 508· 11th Cir.· 1990-09-07 ·cited 14×
  The court concurs in the result but disagrees with the reasoning that Stone v. Powell does not apply when state appellate courts do not issue opinions.
• United States v. Patrick
  899 F.2d 169· 2d Cir.· 1990-03-27 ·cited 14×
  The court held that law enforcement officials had probable cause to arrest the defendant, and thus his subsequent inculpatory statements were admissible.
• United States v. Iglesias
  881 F.2d 1519· 9th Cir.· 1989-08-15 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the district court did not err in refusing to suppress cash seized from a third party's residence, nor in denying the defendant's motion to compel production of internal government laboratory documents.
• United States v. Kerr
  876 F.2d 1440· 9th Cir.· 1989-06-08 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the totality of the circumstances, including corroborated anonymous tips and independent police observations, provided probable cause for the search warrant, but vacated the sentence due to a procedural due process violation at sentencing.
• United States v. Bernardo L. Zabalaga
  834 F.2d 1062· D.C. Cir.· 1987-12-11 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the defendant lacked a legitimate expectation of privacy in the vehicle and its contents, that sufficient evidence supported his conviction for constructive possession of cocaine, and that the jury instructions did not constitute reversible error.
• United States v. Tisdale
  817 F.2d 1552· 11th Cir.· 1987-06-02 ·cited 14×
  The court held that any constitutional error in using booking photographs from a prior arrest was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt due to overwhelming evidence of guilt, and that the trial court did not err in refusing jury instructions or limiting impeachment evidence.
• United States v. Royal Stafford Terry
  760 F.2d 939· 9th Cir.· 1985-05-13 ·cited 14×
  The court held that there was sufficient evidence to convict the defendant of armed bank robbery and that the trial court did not err in admitting certain evidence.
• United States v. Clifford Howard (83-5434
  752 F.2d 220· 6th Cir.· 1985-01-11 ·cited 14×
  The dissenting judge believes the tape recordings of conversations between co-conspirators were admissible as evidence against Clifford Howard. The jury could find the statements furthered the conspiracy's aim of obtaining insurance proceeds.
• State v. Jones
  454 So. 2d 774· Fla. 3d DCA· 1984-08-28 ·cited 14×
  The State appealed a trial court's suppression order of 48 cans of spray paint found in a grocery cart near Jones. The appellate court reversed, holding that Jones lacked a reasonable expectation of privacy in the items by disavowing knowledge of them, and that the police encount
• United States v. Steele
  727 F.2d 580· 6th Cir.· 1984-02-09 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the appellants' Sixth Amendment rights were not violated by government informants, the evidence was sufficient to support convictions, and searches were lawful.
• United States v. Schecter
  717 F.2d 864· 3d Cir.· 1983-09-26 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the warrantless search of the automobile's passenger compartment was lawful as a search incident to a lawful arrest, and the search of the trunk was lawful under the automobile exception to the warrant requirement.
• United States v. Schmidt
  662 F.2d 498· 8th Cir.· 1981-10-29 ·cited 14×
• United States v. Tinkle
  655 F.2d 617· 5th Cir.· 1981-09-08 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the warrantless arrest of Tinkle and Garrett was supported by probable cause, and therefore the evidence seized should not have been suppressed.
• United States v. Molt
  631 F.2d 258· 3d Cir.· 1980-10-09 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the Speedy Trial Act's time limits were not exceeded, and affirmed the district court's denial of the defendant's motion to dismiss the indictments.
• Sanders v. State
  385 So. 2d 735· Fla. 2d DCA· 1980-07-09 ·cited 14×
  Sanders was stopped based on an anonymous tip and police seized contraband from his vehicle. The court held that while the stop was valid based on the corroborated anonymous tip, the subsequent search of the automobile was invalid because the officers lacked probable cause and ha
• United States v. Matthews
  615 F.2d 1279· 10th Cir.· 1980-02-29 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the military officers had probable cause to arrest the defendant and that the subsequent searches of his person and vehicle were lawful under established exceptions to the warrant requirement. Therefore, the evidence obtained was admissible.
• United States v. Santia-Manriquez
  603 F.2d 575· 5th Cir.· 1979-10-01 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the marijuana was the fruit of an illegal stop and that the abandonment of the evidence was not voluntary, thus affirming the suppression.
• United States v. Pappas
  600 F.2d 300· 1st Cir.· 1979-06-14 ·cited 14×
  The warrantless seizure of Pappas' car, subject to forfeiture, was constitutionally permissible due to probable cause and exigency, and the subsequent in-custody search was also valid.
• King v. State
  371 So. 2d 120· Fla. 1st DCA· 1978-12-01 ·cited 14×
  King and Morris were convicted of marijuana delivery after police conducted an illegal warrantless entry into Morris' home without announcing their authority and purpose, in violation of Florida Statutes Section 901.19(1). The appellate court reversed their convictions, finding t
• United States v. Eliseo A. Resendez
  578 F.2d 1041· 5th Cir.· 1978-08-23 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the investigatory stop of the Cadillac was not based on reasonable suspicion because the government agents lacked specific articulable facts to warrant suspicion of customs law violations.
• United States v. Rubalcava-Montoya
  597 F.2d 140· 9th Cir.· 1978-08-22 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the testimony of witnesses discovered as a result of an illegal search was not sufficiently attenuated from the illegality to be admissible, requiring reversal of convictions.
• United States v. Doyle Kent Ogden
  572 F.2d 501· 5th Cir.· 1978-05-04 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the search of the vehicle was lawful based on probable cause from the odor of marijuana, and that the defendant's post-arrest statements were voluntary and admissible.
• United States v. Bradley
  571 F.2d 787· 4th Cir.· 1978-02-23 ·cited 14×
  A parole officer must secure a warrant before searching a parolee's residence, even with probable cause, unless an established exception to the warrant requirement applies.
• United States v. Kelly
  551 F.2d 760· 8th Cir.· 1977-03-14 ·cited 14×
  The court held that evidence seized from common areas of an apartment building with landlord consent was admissible, and statements by a codefendant, introduced to show falsity, did not violate the confrontation clause or hearsay rules.
• United States v. Kelly
  547 F.2d 82· 8th Cir.· 1977-01-04 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the initial warrantless search of the rental car was unreasonable under the Fourth Amendment, and the derivative evidence obtained from a subsequent illegal search should also be suppressed.
• United States v. Wynn
  544 F.2d 786· 5th Cir.· 1977-01-03 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the appellant's arrest for marijuana possession was unlawful due to a lack of probable cause, and therefore, the evidence obtained from that arrest, including counterfeit money, should have been suppressed.
• Maruca v. State
  329 So. 2d 427· Fla. 3d DCA· 1976-04-06 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the officers had sufficient suspicion to stop the defendants, making the subsequent searches legal and the seized evidence admissible.
• United States v. Pike
  523 F.2d 734· 1st Cir.· 1975-11-17 ·cited 14×
  The court affirmed all appellants' federal gambling convictions, finding no taint from an illegal prior search and sufficient evidence to support convictions.
• United States v. Shavers
  524 F.2d 1094· 8th Cir.· 1975-10-30 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the defendant's arrest lacked probable cause, rendering his subsequent confession and other evidence inadmissible as fruits of an illegal arrest.