inevitable discovery doctrine in Mississippi

2026The inevitable-discovery exception to the exclusionary rule for evidence obtained by an illegal or warrantless search applies when the evidence or information “inevitably would have been discovered by lawful means.” Nix v. Williams, 467 U.S. 431, 444 , 104 S. Ct. 2501 , 81 L.

2026The inevitable-discovery exception to the exclusionary rule for evidence obtained by an illegal or warrantless search applies when the evidence or information “inevitably would have been discovered by lawful means.” Nix v. Williams, 467 U.S. 431, 444 , 104 S. Ct. 2501 , 81 L.

2026Under the inevitable discovery doctrine, unlawfully obtained evidence “will be admissible if it can be shown that this evidence would have ultimately been discovered by constitutionally permissible means.” Pugh v. State, 101 So. 3d 682, 689 (¶29) (Miss.

2015The State alternatively argues in its supplemental brief that “this Court may rely on the inevitable-discovery doetrine[.]” The inevitable-discovery doctrine states that “results of an unreasonable search will be admissible if it can be shown that this evidence would have ultimately been discovered by constitutionally permissible means.” Pugh v. State, 101 So.3d 682, 689 (¶29) (Miss.Ct.App.2012) (citing Nix v. Williams, 467 U.S. 431, 444 , 104 S.Ct. 2501 , 81 L.Ed.2d 377 (1984)).

2015Under the good-faith exception, the State may admit “evidence obtained by officers acting in reasonable reliance on a search warrant issued by a detached and neutral magistrate but ultimately found to be invalid.” Magee v. State, 73 So. 3d 1183, 1189 (¶21) (Miss.

2015Under the good-faith exception, the State may admit “evidence obtained by officers acting in reasonable reliance on a search warrant issued by a detached and neutral magistrate but ultimately found to be invalid.” Magee v. State, 73 So.3d 1183, 1189 (¶ 21) (Miss.Ct.App.2011) (citing United States v. Leon, 468 U.S. 897, 918-21 , 104 S.Ct. 3430 , 82 L.Ed.2d 677 (1984)).

2009Additionally, the State argues that the police would have inevitably discovered the identity of Hernandez and spoken with her. “[Ujnder the inevitable discovery doctrine, the results from an unreasonable search will be admissible if it can be shown that this evidence would have ultimately been discovered by constitutionally permissible means.” Powell v. State, 824 So.2d 661, 667 (¶28) (Miss.Ct.App.2002) (citing Nix v. Williams, 467 U.S. 431, 444 , 104 S.Ct. 2501 , 81 L.Ed.2d 377 (1984)).