What does the "fruit of the poisonous tree" doctrine refer to?

The "fruit of the poisonous tree" doctrine refers specifically to evidence that is obtained as a direct result of exploitation from previously unconstitutionally obtained evidence. This legal principle holds that if the initial evidence is acquired through a violation of a defendant's constitutional rights, such as during an unlawful search or seizure, any subsequent evidence derived from that original tainted evidence is also inadmissible in court.

This doctrine aims to deter law enforcement from violating constitutional rights and to ensure that the justice system does not benefit from such violations. The concept can also extend to evidence that is derived from the initial unlawful action, creating a chain of events that leads to additional evidence being gathered improperly.

In contrast, the other options do not fully capture the essence of the doctrine. Evidence that is irrelevant pertains to the materiality of evidence rather than its derivation from tainted sources. Statements made under duress focus specifically on the voluntariness of confessions or statements rather than the overarching principle of how evidence is obtained. Finally, stating that all evidence collected during an unlawful search is automatically inadmissible overlooks situations where separate admissible evidence may exist, provided it is not derived from the unconstitutional action. Thus, the accurate definition lies in how the principle specifically focuses on evidence obtained as