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

The "fruit of the poisonous tree" doctrine is a legal principle that addresses the admissibility of evidence obtained through unlawful means. Specifically, it holds that evidence acquired from illegal searches or seizures is tainted and, therefore, inadmissible in a court of law. This doctrine emphasizes the importance of upholding constitutional rights and deterring illegal conduct by law enforcement.

When evidence is deemed to be the "fruit" of a "poisonous tree," it suggests that if the initial evidence or information was obtained through a violation of an individual’s rights—such as an unlawful search or seizure—then any secondary evidence derived from that initial illegality is also inadmissible. This serves to protect individuals from unlawful governmental actions and reinforces the rule of law within the judicial system.

In contrast, evidence obtained through legal interrogation, lawful arrests, or court-issued documents does not fall under this doctrine, as they do not involve initial illegality that would taint subsequent findings. The significance of the "fruit of the poisonous tree" doctrine lies in maintaining the integrity of the legal process and ensuring that only evidence gathered in a lawful manner can be used against individuals in court proceedings.