There are many rules governing whether or not a particular piece of evidence can be introduced at trial. Often, these rules are applied to prevent the prosecution from introducing evidence. Do the same rules generally also apply to the defense?
For example, suppose officers obtain a DNA sample and send it off for testing. Later, it turns out they needed a warrant, but didn't get one, so the prosecution cannot use the test results. If the test shows the suspect is not the culprit, is the defense allowed to introduce this into evidence? Or are they bound by the same rules as the prosecution?