What is required for evidence to be admissible under the Attenuation Doctrine?

For evidence to be deemed admissible under the Attenuation Doctrine, the presence of intervening circumstances is essential. This doctrine allows courts to consider whether the connection between illegal police conduct and the evidence obtained has been sufficiently weakened by these intervening factors.

When intervening circumstances occur, they can break the causal chain between the original misconduct and the acquisition of the evidence, demonstrating that the evidence would have been obtained regardless of the initial illegality, or that the defendant's choices had a significant role in bringing about the evidence. This might include voluntary acts by the accused, such as making a confession or leading officers to the evidence. The key factor here is that these circumstances must show an independent basis for the evidence that is not directly tied to the unlawful police action.

This doctrine is used to determine whether the evidence is admissible even if it was initially obtained through questionable means by law enforcement. Hence, the presence of intervening circumstances plays a vital role in assessing the admissibility of the evidence under the Attenuation Doctrine.