Legal Opinion

David Wright v. State of Indiana

Indiana Supreme Court

Decided October 4, 2018No. 18S-CR-166PublishedCited by 22 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Goff, Justice.

*311 Nearly a century ago, this Court adopted and applied the exclusionary rule to Indiana's jurisprudence. The rule provides: When, in violation of Article 1, Section 11 of the Indiana Constitution, the State gains evidence by illegal means (i.e., an unreasonable search or seizure), it may not then use that evidence against the defendant. Through the fruit of the poisonous tree doctrine, we've extended the exclusionary rule to exclude evidence directly or derivatively obtained from the illegal conduct. This present case tests that rule's limits. Specifically, this case asks, as a…

2Cases cited34 opinions

  1. Wong Sun v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
  2. Mapp v. OhioSupreme Court of the United States · 1961
  3. United States v. LeonSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
  4. Brown v. IllinoisSupreme Court of the United States · 1975
  5. Litchfield v. StateIndiana Supreme Court · 2005

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

3Cited by22 opinions

  1. Marcus Zanders v. State of IndianaIndiana Supreme Court · 2019
  2. William Washburn v. State of IndianaIndiana Court of Appeals · 2019
  3. Daniel Vega v. State of IndianaIndiana Court of Appeals · 2019
  4. Joshua J. Kelp v. State of IndianaIndiana Court of Appeals · 2019
  5. Keith v. StateIndiana Court of Appeals · 2019

17 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