# Owens v. State

> Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama · June 12, 1973 · 51 Ala. App. 50

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9658997

## Case

- **Full name:** Norman OWENS v. STATE
- **Court:** Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama
- **Decided:** June 12, 1973
- **Citations:** 51 Ala. App. 50; 282 So. 2d 402; 1973 Ala. Crim. App. LEXIS 1113
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Dissent by Almon
- **Judges:** Cates, Tyson, Decarlo, Almon
- **Cited by:** 27 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9658997

## Opinion text

ALMON, Judge
(dissenting).
I respectfully dissent inasmuch as I feel the “fruits of the poisonous tree” doctrine inappropriate to the facts in this case.
Chief Justice Burger, then a Circuit Judge, in Harried v. United States, 128 U.S.App.D.C. 330 , 389 F.2d 281 , wrote:
“. . . From its inception, the ‘fruit of the poisonous tree’ doctrine has not applied where the information was also obtained from an ‘independent’ source. Silverthorne Lumber Co. v. United States, 251 U.S. 385, 392 , 40 S.Ct. 182 , 64 L.Ed. 319 (1920). See Costello v. United States, 365 U.S. 265, 280 , 81 S.Ct. 534 , 5 L.Ed.2d 551 (1961).”
The search warrant issued by Judge Powell was supported by an affidavit alleging facts sufficient to show probable cause. Nothing on the face of the affidavit indicated a prior search. More importantly, none of the facts alleged in the affidavit were acquired by exploitation of knowledge gained as a result of the first search.
The point is that probable cause existed at the time of the Decatur search. This probable cause was established by facts totally separate and independent of the fruits of the prior search.
*64 An illegal search by police officers should not forever preclude them from later effecting a legal search where the fruits of the prior illegal search in no way contributed to the subsequent valid search. The rationale in United States v. Iannelli, 339 F.Supp. 171 , supports this view.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9658997. Public record. Not legal advice.