Wells v. State

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• “Under the ‘fruit of the poisonous tree’ doctrine, the exclusionary rule bars the admission at trial of physical evidence ... obtained directly or indirectly through the exploitation of the police illegality.”
• “Under the ‘fruit of the poisonous tree’ doctrine, the exclusionary rule bars the admission at trial of physical evidence ... obtained directly or indirectly through the exploitation of the police illegality.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

3 cases in this archive cite this case.

• State v. Nowak
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 2008-12-05· cited 5×
• Romuliss Jarvis Hicks v. State of Florida
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 2016-01-27· cited 4×
• Thornton v. State
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 2012-03-07· cited 2×

Cites

12 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• Wong Sun v. United States
  Supreme Court· 1963-01-14· cited 12,871×
• United States v. Ceccolini
  Supreme Court· 1978-12-05· cited 702×
• United States v. Wayne Garfield Brookins, III
  Fifth Circuit· 1980-04-03· cited 149×
• United States v. James Lynn Hooton
  Ninth Circuit· 1981-11-30· cited 88×
• State v. Frierson
  Supreme Court of Florida· 2006-02-09· cited 57×
• Moody v. State
  Supreme Court of Florida· 2003-01-23· cited 46×
• United States v. Jerome P. Mergist
  Fifth Circuit· 1984-07-26· cited 31×
• Sanchez-Velasco v. State
  Supreme Court of Florida· 1990-10-11· cited 25×
• Williams v. State
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 1994-08-03· cited 17×
• Reilly v. State
  Supreme Court of Florida· 1990-03-08· cited 13×
• State v. Stevens
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 1991-01-23· cited 12×
• Wimberly v. State
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 1981-01-20· cited 6×