What is 'fruit of the poisonous tree' and its relevance to admissibility?

• A. Evidence derived from illegal searches or seizures is generally excluded
• B. It refers to actual poisonous substances
• C. It relates to chain of custody
• D. It means all evidence is admissible

Answer: (A)

Fruit of the poisonous tree is a legal rule that says evidence obtained as a result of illegal police conduct—like an illegal search or seizure—cannot be used in court. The idea is that if the source of the evidence is tainted by a constitutional violation, anything found or derived from that source should also be excluded to deter unlawful behavior and protect rights. For example, if officers unlawfully search a home and later use information or items found during that search, those items and any later discoveries tied to them are typically inadmissible unless a specific exception applies.

Exceptions exist, such as evidence obtained from an independent source, evidence that would have been discovered anyway (inevitable discovery), attenuation of the causal link between the illegal act and the evidence, or in some cases good faith reliance on a flawed but reasonable police assumption. These carve-outs explain why not all tainted leads are forever barred, but the default principle remains: evidence derived from illegal searches or seizures is generally excluded.

The other options miss the point: it isn’t about poisonous substances, it isn’t about chain of custody, and it certainly isn’t about all evidence being admissible.