Origin 1920
The independent source doctrine is an exception to the exclusionary rule in United States law permitting evidence first discovered through an unlawful search to be admitted anyway if it was also obtained through a later, lawful means genuinely separate from the illegal conduct. The Supreme Court set out its rationale in Nix v. Williams in 1984, holding that the interest in deterring unlawful police conduct must be balanced against the public interest in juries receiving all probative evidence, so that police are placed in neither a better nor a worse position than if the misconduct had never happened. The governing test comes from Murray v. United States in 1988: the doctrine applies only when the decision to seek a warrant was not prompted by what officers observed during the illegal entry, and when information from that entry was not given to the magistrate or did not influence the issuance of the warrant. A later case, State v. Boll in 2002, extended the doctrine to partially tainted warrant applications where the untainted information alone still establishes probable cause.
Facts
Origin Period Core PrincipleEvidence first found during an unlawful search remains admissible if it is later, separately obtained through a lawful search or seizure that is genuinely independent of the unlawful one. 2 Origin Period
Origin Period (category)20th Century (1900-1999) 1 Connections
Associated With
The independent source doctrine is a named exception narrowing the exclusionary rule.
In Legal System
U.S. criminal procedure exception admitting evidence also obtained through a source genuinely independent of an earlier illegal search.
Sources
1. Silverthorne Lumber Co. v. United States, 251 U.S. 385 (Cornell LII)
Opinion of the Court by Justice Holmes, decided Jan. 26, 1920, paragraph on use of the illegally seized documentsQuote, Opinion of the Court by Justice Holmes, decided Jan. 26, 1920, paragraph on use of the illegally seized documents
If knowledge of them is gained from an independent source they may be proved like any others, but the knowledge gained by the Government's own wrong cannot be used by it in the way proposed.
View the Source 2. Exclusionary Rule (Cornell LII Wex)
Cornell Law School Legal Information InstituteCornell LII Wex, Exclusionary Rule entry, independent source doctrine subsectionQuote, Cornell LII Wex, Exclusionary Rule entry, independent source doctrine subsection
Evidence initially obtained during an unlawful search or seizure may later be admissible if the evidence is later obtained through a constitutionally valid search or seizure.
View the Source Frequently Asked Questions
What does the independent source doctrine allow?
Evidence first found unlawfully can be admitted if later obtained through a genuinely independent lawful search.
It is an exception to the exclusionary rule in United States law. Evidence first found during an unlawful search or seizure may still be admissible if it is later obtained through a constitutionally valid search or seizure that is genuinely independent of the earlier illegality.
Which case first stated the principle?
Silverthorne Lumber Co. v. United States (1920).
The doctrine traces to Silverthorne Lumber Co. v. United States, 251 U.S. 385, decided on January 26, 1920. Justice Holmes wrote that if knowledge of illegally seized documents is gained from an independent source, they may be proved like any others, but knowledge gained by the Government's own wrong cannot be used by it.
Reader Challenges (0)
No disputes yet. Spotted an error or a better source? Open the first one.
Sign in to dispute this or suggest a correction.