Due Process #6

FOPT, DOT

US v. Ceccolini facts?

• Police find policy slips at a flower shop, they ask the owner whose envelope it was; says Ceccolini

• Months pass and Ceccolini gets charged, however, police did not have a warrant to look through evidence/envelopes

US v. Ceccolini issue?

Whether the degree of attenuation between the unlawful search and Hennessey’s testimony was sufficient to break the connection and allow her testimony to be admissible in court.

US v. Ceccolini holding?

In favor of the US

US v. Ceccolini reasoning?

• Makes a distinction between physcial and verbal evidence

• A witness may come forward on his/her own,, and a great ideal that the live witness testimony will happen naturallly rather than illegality

• Finding real life evidence dissipates quicker; can be used

Silverthorne v. US facts?

• Two guys who own a lumber company were detained, and the representatives of the department of justice and US marshal went through their office and took papers, etc.

• The Silverthorne's then ask the court for their stuff back because they claim it was seized illegally

• They give stuff back, but photocopied the illegally seized evidence to use against them

Silverthorne v. US issue/holding?

• Can this evidence, that was seized under an unlawful search and seizure, be used against them?

  • Court says no; in favor of Silverthorne

Silverthorne v. US reasoning?

• Fruit of poisonous tree established

• Extension of the ER

• Second evidence (photocopies) from original illegality cannot be used in court

• In favor of Silverthorne

What is FOPT?

• Fruit of the Poisonous Tree

• Extension of the ER

• Not only can direct evidence of a police illegality be thrown out, but second evidence may as well

• Tree = police illegality; what they did wrong

• Fruit = secondary evidence as a result of tree

When ratified the BOR….

• only intended to limit fed. gov’t

4 factors for DOT: also what case determined it?

• Brown v. IL

• 1. Time elapsed between illegality and the seizure of the fruit

• 2. Flagrancy of the initial misconduct of law enforcement

• 3. Existence or absence of intervening causes of the seizure of the fruit   

• 4. Presence of act of free will by defendant 

Wong Sun v. US facts?

• a lot of facts

• 4 pieces of evidence challenged to supress because of FOPT

• 3 pieces of evidence were out, except for 1 because of DOT

• Read over notes for Wong Sun; lots of facts

Wong Sun significance?

Gave us an illustration of fruit of the poisonous tree; exclusionary rule can also apply to secondary evidence

What is DOT?

• Dissipation of the Taint

• If there is no connection between the illegality and the evidence, evidence is then said to become so "attenuated" from the illegality, that the taint is dissipated

  • Attenuated - far apart from

  • Taint dissipated - clean, not affected by the illegality

Brown v. IL significance?

• What a court looks at to determine whether or not there is a dissipation of the taint

• Lays out the 4 factors to look at when to decide whether or not there is a connection between an illegality and the fruit; has the fruit become so attenuated from the illegality that it can be used against the defendant

4 factors for DOT?

• Time elapsed between illegality and the seizure of the fruit

  • Dissipated = can be used; exception applies

• Flagrancy of the initial misconduct of law enforcement

  • Bad faith = takes longer to dissipate

  • Good faith = does not take long to dissipate

• Existence of absence of intervening causes of the seizure of the fruit

• Presence of act of free will by the defendant