what rule states that evidence gained by illegal means cannot be used against a person?

Answer 1

In the US, the Exclusionary rule.

See also the Wong Sun case in the Supreme Court, for the "fruit of the poisonous tree" doctrine, and some exceptions to the Exclsuionary rule (attenuation, independent source).

Answer 2

That is known as the Exclusionary Rule.

It is a rule of judicial creation that excludes all evidence obtained from an illegal search. If the police find something and they do not have probable cause, then usually it will be excluded unless it falls into an exception. The rule stems from the 4th Amendment.

There are many landmark Supreme Court cases on this issue, as noted in the article below.

Answer 3

That is the Exclusionary Rule. It has a different number in different states, unless those states adopted the Model Rules of Evidence.

Answer 4

See Mapp v. Ohio. Evidence obtained through a search which violates the 4th Amendment ban on illegal searches cannot be used at trial. This wasn't always the case. Prior to Mapp, a defendant could sue for the illegal search, but the evidence could still be used at his criminal trial.

Answer 5

Fruit of the Poisonous Tree doctrine, which is an extension of the exclusionary rule, which is subject to some exceptions.

Answer 6

i think it's evidence gained by illegal means cannot be used against you in a court of law akak submitted for evidence. theres a difference there.

Answer 7

In general it applies to the 5th Amendment in the Bill of Rights which describes search and seizure. There have been additional add ons since then, like the Miranda Rights in Miranda v California, but it all basically comes back to this amendment.

Hope this helps. This link can give you some more info. http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data/constitution/amendment05/

Answer 8

don't know, but whoever thought it up has let a whole bunch of criminals loose!!!!!!