What I mean specifically is that because the police saw illegally obtained evidence, all evidence collected afterward after that point should be considered fruit of the poisoned tree and inadmissible
IANAL. But the argument for the right to search was twofold, one was considered unconstitutional the other wasn't.
If I search you based on probable cause and fear of destruction of evidence, and the judge rules one was valid and the other not, is the evidence inadmissible?
To me it's clearly an if OR search not an if AND search. Otherwise you disincentivize multiple justifications to do something.