What happens to evidence obtained in violation of Miranda?

When evidence is obtained in violation of Miranda rights, it is deemed inadmissible at trial. The Miranda warning is a constitutional requirement stemming from the Fifth Amendment, which ensures that individuals are informed of their rights against self-incrimination before being subjected to custodial interrogation. If law enforcement officials fail to provide these warnings appropriately, any statements made or evidence obtained as a result may not be used against the defendant in a trial setting.

This rule serves to protect the integrity of the judicial process by preventing involuntary confessions and promoting fair treatment of individuals in custody. While there may be specific circumstances under which derivative evidence could potentially be used (for instance, if there were other independent sources for the evidence), the initial statements or their direct fruits resulting from a Miranda violation are generally excluded from trial.

The other choices do not align with how the judicial system treats evidence acquired in violation of these constitutional safeguards. Evidence obtained unlawfully does not have utility in a trial context, which maintains the importance of protecting the defendants' rights.