United States v. Hernandez, No. 11-40201 (5th Cir. 2012)
Annotate this CaseDefendant pleaded guilty to one count of harboring an undocumented alien for financial gain. On appeal, defendant argued that the district court erred in denying her motion to suppress because the post-Miranda statements that she, her boyfriend, and the illegal alien made constituted fruits of the poisonous tree. The court agreed and held that defendant's post-arrest statements were inadmissible under the exclusionary rule where there was no indication that more than a few hours had passed between the Fourth Amendment violation made by police and ICE agents at defendant's home and the statements made at the ICE officer; the record did not reveal, and the Government did not raise, any intervening circumstances that would have broken the causal chain; and the court previously noted that the officers' conduct was egregious. Because neither of the attenuation nor the inevitable discovery exceptions to the exclusionary rule applied, the court held that the district court did not err in excluding the testimony of defendant's boyfriend and the illegal alien. Accordingly, the court reversed and remanded for further proceedings.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.