Utah Special Function Officer (SFO) Practice Exam

Which of the following describes the Fruit of the Poisonous Tree Doctrine?

1. Evidence obtained under a warrant is always admissible

2. Evidence derived from illegal actions is admissible

3. Evidence derived from illegal search is inadmissible

4. All evidence is admissible if relevant

The correct answer is: Evidence derived from illegal search is inadmissible

The Fruit of the Poisonous Tree Doctrine is a legal principle that addresses the admissibility of evidence obtained through illegal means. This doctrine asserts that if evidence is obtained as a result of an illegal search, seizure, or interrogation, not only is that evidence itself deemed inadmissible in court, but any other evidence derived from that illegal action is also tainted and inadmissible. Choosing the option that states evidence derived from an illegal search is inadmissible aligns perfectly with the essence of this doctrine. The reasoning behind this principle is to deter law enforcement from engaging in unlawful conduct and to uphold the integrity of the judicial process. By discarding the fruits of illegal actions, courts aim to discourage violations of constitutional rights. The other options highlight common misconceptions about evidence admissibility. For instance, stating that evidence obtained under a warrant is always admissible overlooks the requirements for executing a search warrant legally. Similarly, the claim that evidence derived from illegal actions is admissible contradicts the core framework of the doctrine. Finally, the concept that all evidence is admissible if relevant ignores the foundational principles of legality and constitutional protection, which the Fruit of the Poisonous Tree Doctrine is designed to enforce.