Wong Sun v. United States
E809985
Wong Sun v. United States is a landmark 1963 U.S. Supreme Court case that refined the exclusionary rule by establishing the “fruit of the poisonous tree” doctrine and clarifying when evidence obtained after an illegal search or arrest must be suppressed.
All labels observed (2)
| Label | Occurrences |
|---|---|
| Wong Sun v. United States canonical | 5 |
| Wong Sun | 2 |
How this entity was disambiguated
This entity first appeared as the object of triple T9607457 — resolving that mention is where its identity was fixed. The disambiguator weighed these candidate entities and picked the highlighted one (or “None”, minting a new entity). This is how homonymy is resolved: the same surface form can point to different entities.
NED1
Entity disambiguation (via context triple)
gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07
Target entity: Wong Sun v. United States Context triple: [Utah v. Strieff, relatedCase, Wong Sun v. United States]
-
A.
Fong Yue Ting v. United States
Fong Yue Ting v. United States is an 1893 U.S. Supreme Court decision that upheld broad federal authority over immigration, affirming the government's power to deport non-citizens without full constitutional protections.
-
B.
Katz v. United States
Katz v. United States is a landmark 1967 Supreme Court case that redefined Fourth Amendment protections by establishing that the amendment safeguards people’s reasonable expectations of privacy, not just physical places.
-
C.
Yasui v. United States
Yasui v. United States was a 1943 U.S. Supreme Court case that upheld the wartime conviction of Minoru Yasui for violating a military-imposed curfew on Japanese Americans, thereby affirming the government’s authority to restrict their civil liberties during World War II.
-
D.
Mapp v. Ohio
Mapp v. Ohio is a landmark 1961 U.S. Supreme Court case that applied the exclusionary rule to the states, holding that evidence obtained in violation of the Fourth Amendment cannot be used in state criminal prosecutions.
-
E.
Wright v. United States
Wright v. United States is a 1938 U.S. Supreme Court case that clarified the scope of presidential veto power and the constitutional requirements for lawmaking under the Presentment Clause.
- F. None of above. chosen
- G. Unsure - the case is ambiguous/there is not enough information to decide.
NED2
Entity disambiguation (via description)
gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07
Target entity: Wong Sun v. United States Target entity description: Wong Sun v. United States is a landmark 1963 U.S. Supreme Court case that refined the exclusionary rule by establishing the “fruit of the poisonous tree” doctrine and clarifying when evidence obtained after an illegal search or arrest must be suppressed.
-
A.
Fong Yue Ting v. United States
Fong Yue Ting v. United States is an 1893 U.S. Supreme Court decision that upheld broad federal authority over immigration, affirming the government's power to deport non-citizens without full constitutional protections.
-
B.
Katz v. United States
Katz v. United States is a landmark 1967 Supreme Court case that redefined Fourth Amendment protections by establishing that the amendment safeguards people’s reasonable expectations of privacy, not just physical places.
-
C.
Yasui v. United States
Yasui v. United States was a 1943 U.S. Supreme Court case that upheld the wartime conviction of Minoru Yasui for violating a military-imposed curfew on Japanese Americans, thereby affirming the government’s authority to restrict their civil liberties during World War II.
-
D.
Mapp v. Ohio
Mapp v. Ohio is a landmark 1961 U.S. Supreme Court case that applied the exclusionary rule to the states, holding that evidence obtained in violation of the Fourth Amendment cannot be used in state criminal prosecutions.
-
E.
Wright v. United States
Wright v. United States is a 1938 U.S. Supreme Court case that clarified the scope of presidential veto power and the constitutional requirements for lawmaking under the Presentment Clause.
- F. None of above. chosen
Statements (46)
| Predicate | Object |
|---|---|
| instanceOf |
United States Supreme Court case
ⓘ
criminal procedure case ⓘ landmark decision ⓘ |
| appliedAmendment |
Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution
ⓘ
Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution ⓘ |
| clarified |
application of the exclusionary rule to derivative evidence
ⓘ
when evidence obtained after an illegal search or arrest must be suppressed ⓘ |
| hasChiefJusticeAtDecision | Earl Warren ⓘ |
| hasCitation | 371 U.S. 471 ⓘ |
| hasCountry |
United States
ⓘ
linked to:
United States of America
|
| hasCourt | Supreme Court of the United States ⓘ |
| hasDocketNumber | No. 36 ⓘ |
| hasImpactOn |
United States criminal procedure
ⓘ
police investigative practices ⓘ suppression of evidence in federal courts ⓘ |
| hasJurisdiction | federal criminal prosecution ⓘ |
| hasLanguage | English opinion ⓘ |
| hasLegalDoctrine |
attenuation doctrine
ⓘ
exclusionary rule ⓘ fruit of the poisonous tree ⓘ |
| hasMajorityOpinionBy | William J. Brennan Jr. ⓘ |
| hasPetitioner |
Wong Sun
ⓘ
linked to:
Wong Sun v. United States
|
| hasRespondent |
United States
ⓘ
linked to:
United States of America
|
| hasSubjectMatter | narcotics offenses ⓘ |
| hasVote | 5–4 ⓘ |
| hasYear | 1963 ⓘ |
| held |
a confession may be admissible if obtained after the taint of an illegal arrest has been sufficiently attenuated
ⓘ
not all evidence is fruit of the poisonous tree simply because it would not have come to light but for illegal actions of the police ⓘ verbal evidence and narcotics obtained as a result of unlawful arrests were inadmissible as fruits of the poisonous tree ⓘ |
| involvesIssue |
Fourth Amendment search and seizure
ⓘ
admissibility of confessions ⓘ attenuation doctrine ⓘ exclusionary rule ⓘ fruit of the poisonous tree doctrine ⓘ illegal arrest ⓘ tainted evidence ⓘ |
| involvesParty |
United States
ⓘ
linked to:
United States of America
Wong Sun ⓘ
linked to:
Wong Sun v. United States
|
| isCitedFor |
definition of fruits of the poisonous tree
ⓘ
limits on admissibility of statements following illegal arrests ⓘ standards for attenuation of taint ⓘ |
| isPartOf | Warren Court jurisprudence ⓘ |
| originatedFrom | United States District Court for the Northern District of California ⓘ |
| wasArguedOn | 1962-10-09 ⓘ |
| wasDecidedOn | 1963-01-14 ⓘ |
| wasRearguedOn | 1962-10-10 ⓘ |
How these facts were elicited
The pipeline generated the facts above by prompting gpt-5.1 with this entity's name + description and the instruction below.
Instruction
You are a knowledge base construction expert. Given a subject entity and a description of it, return factual statements that you know for the subject as a JSON list of dictionaries(triples), where keys must be "subject", "predicate" and "object". The number of facts may be very high, between 25 to 50 or more, for very popular subjects. For less popular subjects, the number of facts can be very low, like 5 or 10. # Requirements - If you don't know the subject at all, return an empty list. - If the subject is not a named entity, return an empty list. - Include at least one triple where predicate is "instanceOf". - Do not get too wordy. - Separate several objects into multiple triples with one object.
Input
Subject: Wong Sun v. United States Description of subject: Wong Sun v. United States is a landmark 1963 U.S. Supreme Court case that refined the exclusionary rule by establishing the “fruit of the poisonous tree” doctrine and clarifying when evidence obtained after an illegal search or arrest must be suppressed.
Referenced by (7)
Full triples — surface form annotated when it differs from this entity's canonical label.
subject linked to:
Utah v. Strieff (dissent on Fourth Amendment rights)
linked to: Wong Sun v. United States
linked to: Wong Sun v. United States