Can evidence obtained as a result of an unlawful search or other illegal police conduct be inadmissible?

People v. Fitzpatrick (1973) 32 N.Y.2d 499, 506, 346 N.Y.S.2d 793, 797, 300 N.E.2d 139, 141 (cert. den., 414 U.S. 1033, 94 S.Ct. 462, 38 L.Ed.2d 324). "(T)he courts have held that evidence obtained as a result of information [80 Cal.App.3d 680] derived from an unlawful search or other illegal police conduct is not inadmissible under the fruit of the poisonous tree doctrine where the normal course of police investigation would, in any case, even absent the illicit conduct, have inevitably led to such evidence."

People v. Soto (1967) 55 Misc.2d 219, 285 N.Y.S.2d 166, 168. "Upon the evidence adduced at this hearing, I find as a fact that the continued search by the police would have led to a discovery of the existence and location of the knife at or shortly after 8 a. m. on May 21st. I find as a further fact that up until the time the police retrieved the knife a hot pursuit and search for such weapon was in progress, and were it not for the tainted admission of the defendant Soto, said hot pursuit and search would have resulted in its discovery by virtue of normal events and police investigation."