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. Castellana
  488 F.2d 65· 5th Cir.· 1974-01-17 ·cited 34×
  Statements made during custodial interrogation without Miranda warnings are inadmissible, and evidence derived from such statements must also be excluded.
• United States v. Flanagan
  423 F.2d 745· 5th Cir.· 1970-02-25 ·cited 34×
  The court held that the search warrant was issued without probable cause because the affidavit failed to establish sufficient grounds for believing stolen property was located at the defendant's residence.
• United States v. Self
  410 F.2d 984· 10th Cir.· 1969-05-14 ·cited 34×
  The court held that the evidence obtained from the defendants was admissible because their detention and subsequent arrest were lawful, and the evidence was not the fruit of any illegal police conduct.
• YAM Sang Kwai v. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv.
  411 F.2d 683· D.C. Cir.· 1969-02-17 ·cited 34×
  The court affirmed the deportation order, finding that the appellant was not subjected to an unreasonable seizure under the Fourth Amendment.
• Harrison v. United States
  387 F.2d 203· D.C. Cir.· 1967-05-18 ·cited 34×
  The court held that the admission of testimony given by a defendant at a prior trial without effective assistance of counsel is reversible error, but that the admission of another defendant's prior testimony, even if tainted, did not prejudice him.
• Smith v. United States
  335 F.2d 270· D.C. Cir.· 1964-04-16 ·cited 34×
  The dissenting judge argues that convictions for unauthorized use and interstate transportation of the Wallace car should be upheld, rendering any error in the Dolinger car theft count immaterial due to concurrent sentences.
• The People OF the State OF Cal. v. Hurst
  325 F.2d 891· 9th Cir.· 1963-12-19 ·cited 34×
  The court held that the search of the premises and the seizure of evidence were illegal, violating the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments, and that the Mapp v. Ohio decision should be applied retroactively in this habeas corpus proceeding.
• Evans Hobson v. United States
  226 F.2d 890· 8th Cir.· 1955-11-15 ·cited 34×
  The court held that the evidence obtained from the defendant's home via an unlawful search and seizure should have been suppressed, and the conviction based on that evidence was therefore erroneous.
• United States v. Ashcroft
  607 F.2d 1167· 5th Cir.· 1979-12-07 ·cited 33×
• Caver v. State OF Ala.
  537 F.2d 1333· 5th Cir.· 1976-09-02 ·cited 33×
  The court held that a state prisoner can no longer collaterally attack a conviction based on a Fourth Amendment violation in a federal habeas proceeding unless they show the state failed to provide a full and fair opportunity to litigate the claim. The court also found the lineup
• United States v. Hall
  543 F.2d 1229· 9th Cir.· 1976-08-31 ·cited 33×
• Hrezo v. State
  780 So. 2d 194· Fla. 2d DCA· 2001-01-31 ·cited 32×
  The court held that the deputy sheriff's use of emergency and takedown lights to check a legally parked car constituted an unauthorized investigatory stop, not a consensual encounter.
• United States v. Walker
  933 F.2d 812· 10th Cir.· 1991-05-07 ·cited 32×
  The court held that the prolonged detention for questioning unrelated to the traffic stop violated the Fourth Amendment, but remanded for a determination of whether the defendant's consent to search was voluntary.
• State v. Davis
  543 So. 2d 375· Fla. 3d DCA· 1989-05-16 ·cited 32×
  The court held that a consensual encounter between a police officer and a citizen does not violate the Fourth Amendment, even if the citizen is on a bicycle and the officer is in a patrol car, as long as there are no indicia of restraint.
• United States v. Alvarez
  810 F.2d 879· 9th Cir.· 1987-02-17 ·cited 32×
  The court held that the government failed to demonstrate exigent circumstances justifying a warrantless arrest, and therefore, the evidence and statements obtained from the arrest should have been suppressed.
• Milford Wade Byrd v. State
  481 So. 2d 468· Fla.· 1985-11-14 ·cited 32×
  Milford Wade Byrd was convicted of first-degree murder for killing his wife and sentenced to death. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed the conviction and death sentence, rejecting claims that his confession was illegally obtained and that the sentencing was improper.
• State v. Rizo
  463 So. 2d 1165· Fla. 3d DCA· 1984-11-20 ·cited 32×
  The State appeals a trial court's order suppressing a photograph of Francisco Rizo taken at a police station after police contacted him based on an informant's tip. The court affirmed the suppression, holding that the initial stop lacked reasonable suspicion and any subsequent de
• United States v. Fitzgerald
  724 F.2d 633· 8th Cir.· 1983-12-07 ·cited 32×
  The court affirmed the conviction, agreeing that the shotgun was validly seized under the plain view doctrine.
• United States v. Hines
  717 F.2d 1481· 4th Cir.· 1983-09-09 ·cited 32×
  The court held that the appellants' convictions were supported by sufficient evidence and that their procedural and evidentiary challenges lacked merit.
• United States v. Downing
  665 F.2d 404· 1st Cir.· 1981-12-04 ·cited 32×
  The court held that questioning a suspect after they invoked their right to counsel constitutes interrogation under Miranda, and the fruits of such interrogation must be suppressed.
• United States v. Jackson
  652 F.2d 244· 2d Cir.· 1981-06-15 ·cited 32×
  The court held that the evidence uncovered as a result of an unlawful arrest must be suppressed.
• United States v. McLEROY
  584 F.2d 746· 5th Cir.· 1978-11-22 ·cited 32×
  The court held that the investigatory stop of the defendant's vehicle was unconstitutional because it was based on an informant's tip that lacked sufficient indicia of reliability and was only corroborated by innocent details.
• United States v. Tuley
  546 F.2d 1264· 5th Cir.· 1977-02-14 ·cited 32×
  The court held that the warrantless search of the pickup camper and the subsequent search of the mobile home were fruits of an illegal search, lacking probable cause based on an uncorroborated informant's tip.
• United States v. Tortorello
  533 F.2d 809· 2d Cir.· 1976-04-01 ·cited 32×
  The court held that the defendant lacked standing to challenge the warrantless search of the garage, and that he voluntarily consented to the search of the basement. Therefore, the suppression order was reversed.
• United States v. Clark
  531 F.2d 928· 8th Cir.· 1976-03-17 ·cited 32×
  The court held that the initial search, which exceeded the scope of the warrant by inventorying personal and business property, was an unreasonable and exploratory search violating the Fourth Amendment.
• State v. Nittolo
  317 So. 2d 748· Fla.· 1975-07-30 ·cited 32×
  The court reviewed a decision suppressing evidence of marijuana found after a traffic stop, agreeing with the dissenting opinion that the evidence should not have been suppressed.
• United States v. Britt
  508 F.2d 1052· 5th Cir.· 1975-02-28 ·cited 32×
  The court held that the defendant lacked standing to challenge the validity of the search and seizure at the second corporate location, and therefore all challenged evidence was properly admitted.
• Richardson v. State
  291 So. 2d 253· Fla. 1st DCA· 1974-03-14 ·cited 32×
  A Florida appeals court reversed the conviction of a 17-year-old for drug possession, holding that the initial stop of his vehicle lacked any probable cause or reasonable suspicion and thus the search and seizure were unconstitutional. The court found that the defendant was stopp
• United States v. Hersh
  464 F.2d 228· 9th Cir.· 1972-07-07 ·cited 32×
  The court held that the deputies' observation through the window was not an illegal search and that the prosecutor's references to an absent witness were not prejudicial.
• United States v. Gerson Nagelberg and Vivienne Nagelberg
  434 F.2d 585· 2d Cir.· 1970-11-09 ·cited 32×
  The court held that evidence derived from a suppressed statement is admissible if the government demonstrates an independent source, and that the trial court did not err in denying severance or in its rulings on cross-examination.
• Howell v. Hoyt C. Cupp
  427 F.2d 36· 9th Cir.· 1970-05-20 ·cited 32×
  The court held that the seizure of the roll of nickels was reasonable under the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments, and this seizure provided sufficient probable cause for a subsequent search warrant.
• United States v. Sterling
  369 F.2d 799· 3d Cir.· 1966-12-15 ·cited 32×
  The court held that the agent's surveillance, entry, and observations were reasonable and consonant with the Fourth Amendment, justifying the arrest and denial of the motion to suppress.
• Reeves v. Warden, Maryland Penitentiary
  346 F.2d 915· 4th Cir.· 1965-02-25 ·cited 32×
  The admission of a yellow note, seized during an unconstitutional search of the petitioner's room, was prejudicial and violated his Fourth Amendment rights, and this constitutional objection was not waived by his counsel's failure to object at trial.
• Burke v. United States
  328 F.2d 399· 1st Cir.· 1964-02-27 ·cited 32×
  The dissenting judge believes Leo's motion to suppress should have been granted because his arrest and the subsequent discovery of incriminating bills were the products of illegal police action.
• United States v. Holzman
  871 F.2d 1496· 9th Cir.· 1989-04-07 ·cited 31×
  The court held that the investigatory detention, arrest, and search incident to arrest of Holzman were lawful, and the subsequent search of his address book was also permissible. The warrantless entry into the hotel rooms was justified by exigent circumstances and probable cause.
• United States v. Bryant L. Hampton
  775 F.2d 1479· 11th Cir.· 1985-11-13 ·cited 31×
  The court held that the government failed to demonstrate that the evidence presented to the grand jury was derived from a legitimate source wholly independent of the appellant's state-immunized testimony.
• United States v. Vance Dyar
  574 F.2d 1385· 5th Cir.· 1978-06-16 ·cited 31×
  The court held that the evidence was insufficient to convict DeMatto of conspiracy, but sufficient to convict Streeter and Dyar. The court also held that Dyar and Streeter lacked standing to challenge the legality of the search.
• United States v. Grover Cleveland Barnes
  909 F.2d 1059· 7th Cir.· 1990-08-09 ·cited 30×
  The court affirmed the conviction, holding that the Speedy Trial Act was not violated, the defendant was not deprived of effective assistance of counsel, the seized revolver was admissible, the search warrant was supported by probable cause, and the notebook was properly admitted
• United States v. Erwin
  875 F.2d 268· 10th Cir.· 1989-05-16 ·cited 30×
  A passenger has standing to challenge the legality of a traffic stop, but lacks standing to challenge the search of a vehicle absent a legitimate expectation of privacy in the searched area.
• United States v. Colonia
  870 F.2d 1319· 7th Cir.· 1989-03-23 ·cited 30×
  The court held that the defendants' arrests and searches were based on probable cause, their consent to search was voluntary, and their convictions were not affected by minor discrepancies in the indictment language or potential attorney conflicts of interest.
• United States v. Streifel
  781 F.2d 953· 1st Cir.· 1986-01-17 ·cited 30×
  The court held that the district court erred in applying the wrong standard to determine if the defendants were in custody for Miranda purposes, and remanded for further factual findings.
• State v. Arnold
  475 So. 2d 301· Fla. 2d DCA· 1985-09-18 ·cited 30×
  The State of Florida appealed trial court orders suppressing evidence and statements from four defendants charged with cannabis trafficking. The appellate court affirmed suppression as to Gardiner and Whitehurst but reversed as to Arnold and Miller, finding that the detentions an
• United States v. Brimberry
  744 F.2d 580· 7th Cir.· 1984-09-18 ·cited 30×
  The court held that the trial court committed plain error by failing to ensure the government's prosecution complied with the plea agreement, requiring a remand for an evidentiary hearing. The court also affirmed the trial court's refusal to dismiss Count I and found no plain err
• United States v. Martell
  654 F.2d 1356· 9th Cir.· 1981-08-31 ·cited 30×
  The court held that the twenty-minute detention of the appellants' luggage, based on a well-founded suspicion of criminal activity, was reasonable under the Fourth Amendment and did not require probable cause.
• United States v. Scios
  590 F.2d 956· D.C. Cir.· 1978-07-21 ·cited 30×
  The court should reverse the District Court's order suppressing evidence.
• United States v. Schmidt
  573 F.2d 1057· 9th Cir.· 1978-02-06 ·cited 30×
  Confessions obtained after torture by foreign authorities are inadmissible in U.S. courts, even if given to U.S. agents, if the coercive effect of the prior torture continues.
• United States v. Galante
  547 F.2d 733· 2d Cir.· 1976-12-14 ·cited 30×
  The court held that evidence discovered as a result of an unconstitutional search is inadmissible, even if seized later.
• United States v. Huss
  482 F.2d 38· 2d Cir.· 1973-06-26 ·cited 30×
  The court held that the government failed to prove that the information used to question Seigel was untainted by unlawful electronic surveillance, reversing the contempt orders.
• United States v. Sheard
  473 F.2d 139· D.C. Cir.· 1972-11-16 ·cited 30×
  The dissenting judge would suppress evidence obtained from an unlawful entry and reverse the conviction.
• United States v. Nelson
  459 F.2d 884· 6th Cir.· 1972-04-21 ·cited 30×
  The court held that a search warrant affidavit containing both illegally obtained and legally obtained information must be quashed if the illegally obtained information is essential to establishing probable cause.