Suppression of Secondary Evidence in New York
People v. Stith, 69 NY2d 313, 506 N.E.2d 911, 514 N.Y.S.2d 201 (1987), made clear that the inevitable discovery rule is inapplicable to primary evidence which is defined as the very "evidence illegally obtained during or as the immediate consequence of the challenged police conduct." Stith, at 318.
On the other hand, secondary evidence is defined as evidence which would, by a very high degree of probability, have ultimately been discovered as a result of further police investigation, independent of the initial taint. Id.
Secondary evidence need not be suppressed if it meets this test, even if obtained as a result of leads or information gained from the primary illegality, so long as it is demonstrated that the secondary evidence would inevitably have been discovered by untainted, independent police investigation. Id. at 318-319.