Legal Opinion · Dissent

People v. Brown

Appellate Court of Illinois

Decided December 29, 2003No. 4-03-0259 RelPublished

1DissentJustice Turner

I respectfully dissent.

I begin by noting that I do not address whether the majority correctly determined that Brown was seized in violation of his fourth amendment rights because, even if the majority is correct, the fruit-of-the-poisonofis-tree doctrine does not extend to suppress Brown’s conduct that formed the basis of his obstructing-justice charges.

The fruit-of-the-poisonous-tree doctrine applies where police officers violate a defendant’s fourth amendment rights. The constitutional violation is termed the “poisonous tree,” and any evidence that the State obtains by exploiting that…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. People v. HillIllinois Supreme Court · 2002
  2. People v. GuilloryCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1960
  3. Irene Ethel Vinyard v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1964
  4. United States v. Otis TroopCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1956
  5. United States v. PerdizDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1966

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API