If evidence is found during an unlawful search, what happens to that evidence?

When evidence is obtained during an unlawful search, it is typically deemed inadmissible in court due to the exclusionary rule. This rule is a legal principle that prevents evidence collected or analyzed in violation of a defendant's constitutional rights from being used in a court of law. The rationale behind the exclusionary rule is to deter law enforcement from conducting illegal searches and seizures, thus protecting individual rights as outlined in the Fourth Amendment.

In cases where evidence is obtained without a proper warrant, consent, or a valid exception to the warrant requirement, that evidence cannot be presented in court as it is considered "tainted." Consequently, this legal framework upholds the integrity of the judicial process by ensuring that law enforcement adheres to constitutional standards when gathering evidence. In contrast, evidence obtained through lawful searches, consent, or in plain view situations may be admissible, which highlights the importance of following proper legal procedures during investigations.