Inevitable discovery
 |
It has been suggested that this article or section be merged with Exclusionary rule, Fruit of the poisonous tree and Taint (legal). (Discuss) Proposed since March 2011. |
| Criminal procedure | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Criminal trials and convictions | ||||||
| Rights of the accused | ||||||
| Fair trial · Speedy trial Jury trial · Counsel Presumption of innocence Exclusionary rule1 Self-incrimination Double jeopardy2 |
||||||
| Verdict | ||||||
| Conviction · Acquittal Not proven3 Directed verdict |
||||||
| Sentencing | ||||||
| Mandatory · Suspended Custodial Dangerous offender4, 5 Capital punishment Execution warrant Cruel and unusual punishment Life · Indefinite |
||||||
| Post-sentencing | ||||||
| Parole · Probation Tariff6 · Life licence6 Miscarriage of justice Exoneration · Pardon Sexually violent predator legislation1 |
||||||
| Related areas of law | ||||||
| Criminal defenses Criminal law · Evidence Civil procedure |
||||||
| Portals | ||||||
| Law · Criminal justice | ||||||
|
||||||
Inevitable discovery is a doctrine in United States criminal procedure that allows evidence of a defendant's guilt that would otherwise be considered inadmissible under the exclusionary rule to be admitted into evidence in a trial.
The doctrine was adopted first by the United States Supreme Court in Nix v. Williams in 1984. It holds that evidence obtained in violation of the defendant's constitutional rights is admissible in court if it can be established, by a preponderance of the evidence, that normal police investigation would have inevitably led to the discovery of the evidence. The rationale for the rule is that police misconduct is sufficiently deterred and the interests of society are better served by putting police in the same position that they would have been in without the rights violation, not a worse position.
  |
This article relating to law in the United States, or its constituent jurisdictions is a stub. You can help Wikipedia by expanding it. |
