Inevitable discovery doctrine states that illegally obtained evidence is admissible if the prosecution can show by a preponderance that it would have been discovered by lawful means.

Inevitable discovery doctrine states that illegally obtained evidence is admissible if the prosecution can show by a preponderance that it would have been discovered by lawful means.

• A. True
• B. False
• C. Only if independent source
• D. Only with a waiver

Answer: (A)

The key idea is that the inevitable discovery doctrine allows illegally obtained evidence to be admitted if it would have been discovered by lawful means anyway. The government must show, by a preponderance of the evidence (more likely than not), that lawful discovery would have occurred regardless of the illegality. This makes the statement true. The doctrine isn’t about a waiver, and it isn’t limited to situations where there is an independent source; those are separate concepts. If the lawful path to discovery would have inevitably led to the evidence, it can be admitted under this rule.

The key idea is that the inevitable discovery doctrine allows illegally obtained evidence to be admitted if it would have been discovered by lawful means anyway. The government must show, by a preponderance of the evidence (more likely than not), that lawful discovery would have occurred regardless of the illegality.

This makes the statement true. The doctrine isn’t about a waiver, and it isn’t limited to situations where there is an independent source; those are separate concepts. If the lawful path to discovery would have inevitably led to the evidence, it can be admitted under this rule.