THE 1970S 1969 1979
SUPREME COURT CASE ROE V WADE
|
Question
[CLICK ON ANY CHOICE TO KNOW THE RIGHT ANSWER]
|
|
|
Terry v. Ohio
|
|
|
Mapp v. Ohio
|
|
|
Tennessee v. Garner
|
|
|
Silverthorne Lumber Co. v. US
|
Detailed explanation-1: -As the metaphor suggests, if the evidential “tree” is tainted, so is its “fruit.” The doctrine was established in 1920 by the decision in Silverthorne Lumber Co. v. United States, and the phrase “fruit of the poisonous tree” was coined by Justice Frankfurter in his 1939 opinion in Nardone v. United States.
Detailed explanation-2: -The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in a 5-3 vote in favor of Mapp. The high court said evidence seized unlawfully, without a search warrant, could not be used in criminal prosecutions in state courts.
Detailed explanation-3: -The exclusionary rule can also extend to chains of evidence, through a doctrine known as “fruit of the poisonous tree.” This describes the idea that evidence collected based on other, illegally obtained evidence is also not admissible.
Detailed explanation-4: -See Wong Sun v. United States, 371 U.S. 471, 488 (1963). Evidence obtained as a result of an unlawful search must be suppressed under the “Fruit of the Poisonous Tree” doctrine.
Detailed explanation-5: -Ohio, 367 U.S. 643 (1961) The prosecution is not allowed to present evidence that law enforcement secured during a search that was unconstitutional under the Fourth Amendment.