blog home Drug Crimes How Does the Exclusionary Rule Affect State and Federal Drug Charges in Los Angeles?

How Does the Exclusionary Rule Affect State and Federal Drug Charges in Los Angeles?

By Los Angeles Criminal Defense Attorney on October 30, 2025

Under the exclusionary rule, courts must throw out evidence gathered through unconstitutional means. Whether you’re facing charges in California state court or under federal drug laws, improper search & seizure can fundamentally weaken the prosecution’s case.

At Werksman Jackson & Quinn LLP, we utilize every tool at our disposal to protect our clients. Below, we break down how the exclusionary rule works, when it applies, and how it can be used it strategically to defend clients charged with everything from possession to trafficking.

What Is the Exclusionary Rule?

The exclusionary rule is a legal doctrine that prevents the government from using evidence obtained in violation of your constitutional rights. In criminal cases, this typically involves:

• Illegal searches and seizures under the Fourth Amendment
• Failure to give Miranda warnings under the Fifth Amendment
• Violations of due process rights

In state and federal courts, the rule applies when law enforcement acts outside the bounds of the Constitution or applicable statutes, and it often applies to poorly conceived and executed drug investigations, arrests, and raids.

What Is the Fruit of the Poisonous Tree Doctrine?

The fruit of the poisonous tree doctrine is closely tied to the exclusionary rule is. This principle holds that illegally obtained evidence is inadmissible in court and any evidence derived from it cannot be used to convict a defendant.

For example, let’s say police enter a home without a warrant and find drugs. They arrest the occupant and obtain a confession during custodial interrogation. Under the fruit of the poisonous tree doctrine, both the drugs and the confession may be suppressed because the initial entry was unconstitutional.

The Exclusionary Rule & California Law

While the exclusionary rule applies in both state and federal court, there are important differences in how it’s interpreted and enforced.

California provides broader protections than federal courts in some cases. State judges can exclude evidence based on violations of state law or the California Constitution, even if the U.S. Constitution wouldn’t require suppression.

For example, in People v. Brisendine, the California Supreme Court held that a more protective standard applies when officers conduct searches related to minor offenses like simple possession.

California evidence suppression motions under Penal Code § 1538.5 allow defense attorneys to challenge evidence obtained through:

• Unlawful traffic stops
• Warrantless home searches
• GPS tracking without authorization
• Overbroad search warrants
• Drug dog alerts with no reasonable suspicion

The Exclusionary Rule Under Federal Law

In federal court, suppression motions are governed by the Fourth Amendment and Rule 12 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure.

Federal courts have carved exceptions where exclusionary may be challenged, such as:

• Good Faith Exception (U.S. v. Leon): If police relied on a defective warrant in “good faith,” the evidence may still be used.
• Inevitable Discovery Doctrine: If the evidence would have been found lawfully anyway.
• Independent Source Doctrine: If separate lawful evidence led to the discovery.

Scenarios Where the Exclusionary Rule May Apply

Illegal Traffic Stops and Searches

Los Angeles officers pull over a vehicle for a minor violation but conduct a search without probable cause or consent. Drugs are found in the glove compartment.

Defense Strategy: Challenge the legality of the traffic stop and argue that the search was unconstitutional. If successful, the drugs are inadmissible.

Warrantless Drug Raids

Police or DEA agents raid a home or warehouse without a valid search warrant or exceed the scope of a warrant by searching areas not listed.

Defense Strategy: Motion to suppress based on search & seizure violations. If the raid is found unlawful, the resulting evidence is excluded.

Improper Interrogations After an Arrest

Following an arrest, officers question a suspect about drug distribution without issuing Miranda warnings.

Defense Strategy: Any confession or admissions made during custodial interrogation without Miranda are inadmissible.

Overreliance on Confidential Informants

Police use an unreliable or unverified informant to justify a search warrant that results in a raid.

Defense Strategy: Attack the credibility of the source and argue that the warrant lacked probable cause. If successful, seized evidence could be deemed inadmissible.

How Suppression Hearings Work

Whether you’re in LA County Superior Court or federal court in downtown Los Angeles, challenging evidence requires a suppression motion and a hearing before the judge.

Suppression Motions Filed in California State Court

• Governed by Penal Code § 1538.5
• Defense must show the search was unlawful
• Burden shifts to the prosecution to justify the search or seizure
• If granted, the suppressed evidence cannot be used at trial

Suppression Motions Filed In Federal Court:

• Suppression motions must be filed under Rule 12(b)(3)
• Hearing involves briefing, witness testimony (often law enforcement), and cross-examination
• Judge rules on admissibility of evidence before trial

What to Do During a Drug Raid or Arrest

If law enforcement raids your home, car, or business, remember:

• Ask for the warrant. If they don’t have one, say clearly: “I do not consent to a search.”
• Remain silent. Do not answer questions until your attorney is present.
• Do not resist physically. Let your lawyer challenge the legality of the search later in court.
• Document everything you remember: times, badge numbers, what was said, and any damage.

Reasons to Choose Werksman Jackson & Quinn LLP

At Werksman Jackson & Quinn LLP, we know how to take full advantage of every flaw in the government’s case, from illegal raids to sloppy police work. Our Los Angeles drug crime defense attorneys have decades of experience defending against complex drug prosecutions in state and federal courts.

We don’t just raise constitutional challenges; we build solid cases that survive appeal. Prosecutors know our reputation, and judges respect our precision. Whether you’re facing possession charges or a federal conspiracy indictment, we will fight tooth and nail to protect your rights.

Speak With an Experienced Los Angeles Drug Crime Attorney

After one of our clients has been arrested or subjected to a police raid in Los Angeles, Werksman Jackson & Quinn LLP will spring into action. That means examining the search, challenging the seizure, and fighting to keep illegally obtained evidence out of court.

Call (213) 688-0460 to learn more today.

Your defense begins with your rights, and we’re here to make sure they’re enforced.