This is excellent news. The ends don't justify the means, just because the person committed crimes doesn't mean the police can ignore the law to find evidence and arrest them.
The police showed up at an overdose case, and found people with drugs, which is obviously true, people without drugs don't overdose. The Good Samaritan act prohibits the police from arresting/investigating people on drug charges during an overdose call. As a result of the arrest the police found evidence of other crimes on his person and charged him with those crimes instead. The judges ruled that because the arrest was illegal, all evidence gathered during the arrest was also illegal. This is EXACTLY the role of judges, to reinforce the law and prevent abuses of power.
I literally can't understand the opposing view because it sounds a lot like "illegally gathered evidence should be admissible in court" which if you know any history at all is a bonkers take.