Independent Source Doctrine, Search Warrants & Excluded Evidence – Why a Pennsylvania criminal court may still allow evidence against you despite improper police or prosecution conduct?
Convictions are made when the prosecution establishes guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. This is based on evidence and a critical tool for any criminal defense lawyer is a motion to suppress evidence based on the 4th & 14th Amendments to the United States Constitution along with Article 1, Section 8 of the Pennsylvania Constitution. One of the most common cases that involve motions to suppress evidence are those involving search warrants.
Police and law enforcement often need to obtain a warrant to obtain key evidence against a defendant. While police misconduct can often jeopardize the prosecution’s case, it doesn’t always result in a dismissal.
How is a Search Warrant Issued?
Before a judge may issue a constitutionally valid search warrant he or she must be furnished with information sufficient to persuade a reasonable person that probable cause exists to conduct a search. The information presented to an issuing authority to demonstrate probable cause for search warrant must be viewed in a common sense, nontechnical, ungrudging and positive manner.
What is Probable Cause for Warrant?
Probable cause for search warrant is based on a finding of the probability, not a prima facie showing, of criminal activity, and deference is to be accorded a judge’s finding of probable cause. The duty of the court reviewing the issuance of a search warrant is simply to ensure that the magistrate/judge had a substantial basis for concluding that probable cause exists. The magistrate’s decision to issue a search warrant must be based on the four corners of the affidavit in support of the issuance of the warrant.
What is the Independent Source Doctrine?
The “independent source doctrine” comes from the need to balance illegal police conduct against the need for juries to receive all probative evidence and permits the introduction of evidence at trial that was procured initially by illegal police conduct but is, nevertheless, supported by probable cause, independent of the misconduct, that is sufficient to support the issuance of a search warrant
The essence of the independent source doctrine is to prevent the government from suffering excessive sanction as a result of the improper actions of its agents (police) and to provide it with the opportunity to reassert its investigation properly through other constitutionally-acceptable means
Two Prong Test – Independent Source
Application of the independent source doctrine applies the following two-prong consideration: (1) whether the decision to seek a search warrant is prompted by what is seen as a result of the government misconduct; and (2) whether the magisterial district judge is informed at all of the information the government improperly obtains.
Application of the independent source doctrine is limited to those cases where the independent source is truly independent from the tainted evidence or the investigative team that engaged in the misconduct leading to discovery of the tainted evidence.
The key question for an appellate court’s review of whether the independent source doctrine applies is whether and to what extent the government profited in their investigation from the initial violation, and whether the second warrant was secured by reference to the fruits of the previous error; in other words, the question is whether a warrant would have issued by the magistrate even absent the knowledge or evidence gleaned by that error.
Contact our criminal defense law firm today!
We offer free case reviews and serve the following areas in Pennsylvania and New Jersey, Atlantic City, Camden, Cherry Hill, Chester, Conshohocken, Doylestown, Media, Norristown, Philadelphia, Pottstown, Salem, Upper Darby, Upper Merion, Upper Providence, Vineland & Woodbury areas.
