Explain three circumstances where the "fruit of the poisonous tree" doctrine does not apply.

Question

What will be an ideal response?

Answer 1

The "fruit of the poisonous tree" doctrine does not apply where illegally obtained evidence could also be obtained from an independent source. It also does not apply where the evidence would inevitably have been discovered anyway by means of constitutionally valid sources. Finally, it does not prevent the introduction of evidence in proceedings where the guilt of the defendant is not being determined.
------------------
The "fruit of the poisonous tree" doctrine means that the exclusionary rule applies to any evidence that was obtained as a result of a constitutional violation. The three exceptions to this doctrine are the independent source rule, inevitable discovery rule, and the collateral use rule.
The independent source rule allows evidence that could have been obtained from a constitutionally valid source. If evidence is obtained from two sources, one legal and one illegal, it is admissible.
The inevitable discovery rule allows evidence that would inevitably have been discovered even without the constitutionally improper evidence. If the evidence eventually would have been obtained from another legal source, it is admissible.
The collateral rule allows evidence obtained in violation of a defendant's rights to be used for purposes other than proving guilt at a trial. An example of a time other than the trial would be a preliminary hearing.