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. Karo
  710 F.2d 1433· 10th Cir.· 1983-06-20 ·cited 10×
  The court held that warrantless installation and monitoring of a beeper inside private residences or storage lockers violates the Fourth Amendment, and evidence obtained from a tainted search warrant must be suppressed.
• Adan Lopez-Mendoza v. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv.
  705 F.2d 1059· 9th Cir.· 1983-04-25 ·cited 10×
  The court reversed the orders of deportation, holding that the exclusionary rule applies to oral statements obtained in violation of the Fourth Amendment in civil deportation proceedings. The court reasoned that the deterrent effect of the exclusionary rule outweighs the social c
• United States v. Moreno
  701 F.2d 815· 9th Cir.· 1983-03-17 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the "knock and notice" requirement of 18 U.S.C. § 3109 applied to the iron gate, and the officers' forced entry without compliance required suppression of the seized evidence.
• United States v. Slater
  692 F.2d 107· 10th Cir.· 1982-10-27 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the in-court identifications were independently valid, rendering any error in admitting the photographic array harmless, but that the failure to instruct on a lesser included offense was prejudicial error.
• State v. Ferguson
  411 So. 2d 963· Fla. 3d DCA· 1982-03-30 ·cited 10×
  Florida appealed a trial court's suppression of defendant Randy Ferguson's statements to police. The trial court had suppressed the statements because they were allegedly derived from confessions obtained illegally from co-defendants in violation of their Fourth Amendment rights.
• United States v. MacDONALD
  670 F.2d 910· 10th Cir.· 1982-02-12 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the investigatory stop, baggage detention for a sniff-search, and seizure of items incident to arrest were lawful under the Fourth Amendment, and thus, the evidence was admissible.
• United States v. Kenyon Battles Tolerton
  669 F.2d 652· 10th Cir.· 1982-02-02 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the seizure of the pawn ticket was justified under the plain view doctrine, and therefore the pistol and documents derived from it were not fruits of an illegal search or seizure.
• United States v. McBEE
  659 F.2d 1302· 5th Cir.· 1981-10-26 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the warrantless search of the defendant's automobile was permissible under the automobile exception to the Fourth Amendment's warrant requirement, and evidence obtained from a subsequent motel room search was admissible due to an independent source.
• M. A. P. v. State
  403 So. 2d 1384· Fla. 2d DCA· 1981-09-30 ·cited 10×
  A warrantless search of a container during an investigatory stop is unlawful unless the officer has either a reasonable belief the detainee is armed (justifying a limited frisk for weapons) or probable cause to arrest before conducting the search. Here, neither condition was sati
• United States v. Tookes
  633 F.2d 712· 5th Cir.· 1980-12-29 ·cited 10×
  An illegal arrest tainted the discovery of the firearm, and the evidence should have been suppressed.
• United States v. Hackley
  636 F.2d 493· D.C. Cir.· 1980-07-17 ·cited 10×
  The dissenting judge would hold that the suspect's statement was inadmissible because the police failed to scrupulously honor his right to cut off questioning after he indicated he did not wish to speak.
• Lewis v. State
  382 So. 2d 1249· Fla. 5th DCA· 1980-04-02 ·cited 10×
  Michael Lewis was convicted of burglary after police officers stopped him on a public street early in the morning while he carried brown paper bags. The Florida appellate court reversed the conviction, holding that the initial stop was illegal under the Fourth and Fourteenth Amen
• Moorehead v. State
  378 So. 2d 123· Fla. 2d DCA· 1980-01-04 ·cited 10×
  Roy Moorehead appealed his conviction for possession of a controlled substance after pleading nolo contendere, challenging the trial court's denial of his motion to suppress evidence. The appellate court reversed, finding the initial police stop was illegal and therefore the sear
• State v. Adams
  378 So. 2d 72· Fla. 3d DCA· 1979-12-18 ·cited 10×
  Florida appeals a trial court's order suppressing marijuana evidence obtained when police officers stood on a chair on the defendants' porch to peer through a window into their apartment without a warrant. The appellate court affirmed the suppression, holding the warrantless sear
• Agnew v. State
  376 So. 2d 13· Fla. 2d DCA· 1979-09-05 ·cited 10×
  Four appellants appealed their drug possession convictions, challenging the trial court's denial of motions to suppress evidence seized from an airplane and automobile. The appellate court held that the trial court erred in finding the airplane had been abandoned, reversed the co
• United States v. Doby
  598 F.2d 1137· 8th Cir.· 1979-05-16 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the defendant's confession was admissible, as it was not the fruit of an illegal search and was voluntarily made, and that the trial court did not err in denying a mistrial or allowing an amendment to the indictment.
• United States v. Humphries
  600 F.2d 1238· 9th Cir.· 1979-01-19 ·cited 10×
  The court held that it had jurisdiction to hear the government's appeal from an order suppressing evidence, and that certain evidence was admissible while other evidence was tainted by an illegal arrest.
• Norman v. State
  362 So. 2d 444· Fla. 1st DCA· 1978-09-07 ·cited 10×
  Ray Alton Norman was convicted of possession of more than five grams of cannabis and possession with intent to sell. The appellate court affirmed the conviction on Count I but reversed on Count II, finding insufficient evidence of intent to sell. The court rejected Norman's argum
• United States v. Monti
  557 F.2d 899· 1st Cir.· 1977-06-24 ·cited 10×
  The court held that statements made by the defendant on May 2, 1974, were admissible because they were made voluntarily in a non-custodial setting, and any taint from prior suppressed statements was dissipated by intervening circumstances and repeated Miranda warnings.
• United States v. Hellman
  556 F.2d 442· 9th Cir.· 1977-06-24 ·cited 10×
  An inventory search of an impounded vehicle is permissible without a warrant only if the searching officer has no significant discretion, and this routine practice must be demonstrated.
• United States v. Mayes
  552 F.2d 729· 6th Cir.· 1977-04-18 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the arrest was illegal due to insufficient probable cause, rendering the subsequent confession inadmissible. Additionally, the consent to search the apartment was coerced, making the discovered evidence inadmissible.
• United States v. Cleveland Dean Edmond
  548 F.2d 1256· 6th Cir.· 1977-02-10 ·cited 10×
  The court held that an anonymous tip, corroborated only by innocent observations of innocent behavior, does not establish probable cause for a search.
• United States v. Ochoa
  543 F.2d 564· 5th Cir.· 1976-12-06 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the jury selection process and in-court identification evidence were not tainted by illegal search or prior jury service, and thus did not warrant suppression.
• United States v. Walker
  535 F.2d 896· 5th Cir.· 1976-07-23 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the validity of the search depends on the legality of the second arrest, not the first, and that the second arrest was based on probable cause, making the search lawful.
• United States v. Mfrs. Nat'l Bank OF Detroit
  536 F.2d 699· 6th Cir.· 1976-06-16 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the magistrate could consider both affidavits together to establish probable cause for the search of the safety deposit box, and that the October 6th affidavit was sufficient to establish probable cause for the initial search.
• Irwin v. Wolff
  529 F.2d 1119· 8th Cir.· 1976-02-17 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the petitioner's arrest was based on probable cause and his indefinite commitment under Nebraska's Sexual Sociopath Act did not constitute cruel and unusual punishment.
• Hopkins v. State OF Ala.
  524 F.2d 473· 5th Cir.· 1975-12-08 ·cited 10×
  The court affirmed the denial of habeas relief regarding the illegal search claim, finding the search justified by exigent circumstances, but remanded for a determination of exhaustion of state remedies on other claims.
• United States v. Green
  523 F.2d 968· 9th Cir.· 1975-10-01 ·cited 10×
  The court held that a co-user with joint access and control over premises can provide valid third-party consent to search, and that a confession is not rendered inadmissible by prior confrontation with illegally seized evidence if the confession is otherwise voluntary.
• United States v. Evans
  507 F.2d 879· 9th Cir.· 1974-10-23 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the observation of individuals in plain view did not constitute an unconstitutional stop, thus the subsequent evidence was not tainted.
• Mattier v. State
  301 So. 2d 105· Fla. 4th DCA· 1974-10-04 ·cited 10×
  The court is bound by its prior decision in Thomas v. State, which controls the outcome in this case involving identical facts.
• United States v. WAC
  498 F.2d 1227· 6th Cir.· 1974-06-20 ·cited 10×
  The court held that evidence derived from an unlawfully obtained wiretap order must be suppressed, even if used to support subsequent orders. The statute's authorization requirements must be strictly followed.
• United States v. Magaddino
  496 F.2d 455· 2d Cir.· 1974-05-02 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the government's failure to disclose information derived from illegal surveillance, despite court order, warranted suppression of evidence and dismissal of the indictment for most defendants, but not for those who failed to show their own rights were violated.
• United States v. Wilson
  488 F.2d 400· 5th Cir.· 1973-12-10 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the evidence found on Miss Wilson was not the fruit of an illegal interrogation of Jones, and the border search of Miss Wilson was justified.
• United States ex rel. Samuel Saiken v. Bensinger
  489 F.2d 865· 7th Cir.· 1973-11-16 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the affidavit for the search warrant was insufficient to establish probable cause. The court also found the curtilage issue required further factual development.
• United States v. Robinson
  479 F.2d 300· 7th Cir.· 1973-06-05 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the trial judge's suppression order should be affirmed because the search of the boxes was tainted by a prior illegal search and the consent given was not valid.
• United States v. Martin
  469 F.2d 5· 2d Cir.· 1972-11-10 ·cited 10×
  The court held that even if the wiretap was illegal, the evidence obtained was admissible because it came from an independent source.
• Hamrick v. Louie L. Wainwright
  465 F.2d 940· 5th Cir.· 1972-08-30 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the in-court identification was admissible even if the initial arrest was unlawful, as the identification procedure was not impermissibly suggestive and the defense strategically introduced evidence of the photographic identification.
• United States ex rel. Lorenzo Richardson v. Rundle
  461 F.2d 860· 3d Cir.· 1972-06-08 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the evidence obtained from the frisk was admissible under Terry v. Ohio, as the officers had reasonable suspicion to believe the petitioner was involved in criminal activity and potentially armed.
• United States v. West
  453 F.2d 1351· 3d Cir.· 1972-01-21 ·cited 10×
  The court held that a defendant has standing to suppress evidence seized from a third party's property if possession of the item is an element of the offense, and that a search of one's own property, even if prompted by police, is not an unconstitutional search.
• United States v. Bruton
  416 F.2d 310· 8th Cir.· 1969-10-07 ·cited 10×
  The appellant lacks standing to challenge the testimony of his accomplice, which was allegedly tainted by the accomplice's prior unconstitutionally obtained confession.
• LeBLANC v. United States
  391 F.2d 916· 1st Cir.· 1968-03-28 ·cited 10×
  The court affirmed the conviction but vacated the sentence, remanding for resentencing.
• Johnson v. United States
  370 F.2d 489· D.C. Cir.· 1966-11-22 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the arrest was lawful, and therefore the incriminating statement and pistol were admissible evidence.
• Mendoza v. United States
  365 F.2d 268· 5th Cir.· 1966-08-09 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the petitioner's claims regarding the indictment's sufficiency, denial of counsel, and evidence obtained from an illegal arrest were without merit.
• Maynard Allen Jacobson v. United States
  356 F.2d 685· 8th Cir.· 1966-03-08 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in refusing to suppress the identification testimony of Officer Peterson, as the testimony was not the fruit of illegal detention and any procedural irregularities were acquiesced in by the defendant.
• Copeland v. United States
  343 F.2d 287· D.C. Cir.· 1964-12-31 ·cited 10×
  The court held that an apology made to a victim shortly after an inadmissible confession, without intervening events, is tainted by the primary illegality and thus inadmissible.
• Martinez v. United States
  333 F.2d 405· 9th Cir.· 1964-06-22 ·cited 10×
  The dissenting judge believes the majority erred in finding genuine consent, arguing the detention constituted false imprisonment.
• United States ex rel. William J. Stacey v. Pate
  324 F.2d 934· 7th Cir.· 1963-11-21 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the voluntary surrender of a bloodstained shirt by the petitioner's wife, without a warrant, did not constitute an unlawful search, and therefore the petitioner's subsequent confession was not tainted by illegally obtained evidence.
• Palmer v. United States
  203 F.2d 66· D.C. Cir.· 1953-02-19 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the search and seizure of pistols were lawful, and therefore the subsequent arrest and seizure of narcotics were also lawful.
• Sanchez v. State
  199 So. 3d 472· Fla. 4th DCA· 2016-08-31 ·cited 9×
  Lorenzo Sanchez was convicted of first-degree felony murder following a traffic stop and arrest in connection with an armed robbery and homicide. The Fourth District Court of Appeal reversed his conviction, holding that the officer lacked reasonable suspicion to stop the vehicle
• Garcia v. State
  88 So. 3d 394· Fla. 4th DCA· 2012-05-16 ·cited 9×
  Luis Garcia appeals his first-degree murder conviction, challenging the trial court's denial of his motion to suppress statements made during an unlawful de facto arrest and its refusal to instruct the jury on the independent act defense. The appellate court reversed Garcia's con