Question

I'm looking for reference works in the fields of the Philosophy of Law and Political Science on the subject of the Fruit of the Poisonous Tree doctrine: the view that certain products of a legal/administrative process that feed into another similar process should be excluded as input to the second process based on the manner in which the products were procured, rather than on their inherent qualities.

I'm interested in questions of rationale, purpose, legitimacy, and limitations of this doctrine, how it fits in larger legal and political frameworks, how it interacts with other values and doctrines, and in various ways in which it has manifested in various legal and administrative contexts (I'm particularly interested in the field of city planning).

Answer 1

The Fruit of the Poisonous Tree doctrine, related to the Philosophy of Law and Political Science, holds that evidence illegitimately obtained must be excluded in court to maintain justice and deter illegal searches.

Step-by-step explanation:

The Fruit of the Poisonous Tree doctrine is a principle derived from the exclusionary rule within the Philosophy of Law and intersects with considerations in Political Science. This doctrine dictates that evidence obtained through unlawful or unconstitutional means (like a warrantless search) should not be admissible in court, as it is tainted by the illegality of the initial search. The rationale underpinning this doctrine is to deter law enforcement from conducting illegal searches and to preserve judicial integrity.

Political philosophy explores the legitimacy and purpose of governmental authority and its related doctrines, norms, and practices. Within city planning, this doctrine impacts how evidence obtained through illegal means can influence the planning process and legal consequences. In the Mapp v. Ohio case, the U.S. Supreme Court held that evidence obtained in violation of the Fourth Amendment cannot be used in state courts, illustrating the doctrine's significant influence on legal proceedings.

Normative political science examines these principles' ethical foundations, aiming to answer what actions produce more benefit than harm and the roles of government in ensuring justice and civil liberties.