search-and-seizure sweden
illegally aquired information in Sweden
<p>In Sweden can information illegally acquired by an unconnected person be used in the prosecution of crimes?</p>

<p>Say a person stole a laptop, found evidence of illegal activity on it and gave it to the authorities saying he stole it. Could it be used against the owner?</p>

<p>Further are there any special classes of information that change the answer? Like say medical or financial data, child porn or terrorism.</p>

<p>It most likely can be used (there is no "fruit of the poisonous tree" doctrine). Drawing on <a href="http://ec.europa.eu/justice/fundamental-rights/files/cfr_cdf_opinion3_2003_en.pdf" rel="noreferrer">this analysis</a> (I can't locate Nytt juridiskt arkiv 1986 online). 
<a href="http://www.notisum.se/rnp/sls/lag/19420740.htm" rel="noreferrer">(Rättegångsbalken, SFS 1942:740) Chapter 35 Section 1</a> (35 Kap.) allows free "sifting, submission, evaluation" of evidence. Evidence can be rejected as insignificant. Specifically (following the analysis paper),</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>The  Swedish  legal  system  does  not  prescribe  that  it  is 
  forbidden  to  present  an  item  of   evidence which the party has
  got hold of while breaking the law. Neither is the court prevented
  from  ascribing such a proof a great value.</p>
</blockquote>

<p>In one instance, blood was illegally drawn (only a doctor or registered nurse may legally draw blood). The Supreme Court ruled that</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>The  fact  that  the  blood  sample  was  drawn  by  a  laboratory<br>
  assistant does not imply such a divergence from the Code of Judicial
  Procedure that it can be seen as a  violation  of  the  Instrument  of
  Government  Chapter  2  Section  6.  Neither  has  any  of  the 
  Swedish   fundamental  principle  of  law  been  set  aside  in   a 
  way  that  prevents  the  submission  of  the  blood   sample.</p>
</blockquote>

<p>"Surplus information" obtained by coercive means can also be used as evidence (i.e. information obtained incidentally, not related to the crime in question). Some limitations seem to have been recently imposed, taking the form on tightening warrant requirements and data retention.</p>
