Preview

Exclusionary Rule Evaluation

Better Essays
Open Document
Open Document
1184 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
Exclusionary Rule Evaluation
Exclusionary Rule Evaluation
CJA-364
November 1, 2011

Exclusionary Rule Evaluation The legal principle established by the exclusionary rule is embodied in the United States of America Constitution and relates to the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments. The Fourth Amendment protects the people by prohibiting illegal searches and seizures. The Fourteenth Amendment ensures offenders are afforded their rights to due process in a criminal trial according to the law. The exclusionary rule also applies to the Fifth Amendment, which protect the people against self incrimination when charged with an offense by a government officer. Furthermore, the rule applies to interrogations where the offender is often pressured by officers to confess to their crimes. In turn, the rule also applies to the Sixth Amendment that ensures every offender has the right to have legal counsel. Ultimately, the rule greatly influences the credibility of any evidence gathered, by government officers, for use in the prosecution of an accused offender. If the evidence presented to the court is found to have been collected in violation of the rule it may be suppressed in any federal or state court. The exclusionary rule is divided into three elements. The first element requires that an item is physically collected as evidence. The second element is that the item of evidence must have been collected by a governmental officer or a person acting on their behalf, for example; confidential informants or citizens acting under posse comitatus. The third element is that there has to be a connection between the collected item of evidence and an illegal action by the officer in obtaining the items (Zalman, 2008). From a law enforcement perspective, state officers were often overly aggressive throughout the twentieth century and pushed the envelope in regards to the individual rights conferred by the United States Constitution. The states often



References: Fourth Amendment, (2010). Enforcing the Fourth Amendment: The exclusionary law. Viewed at, http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data/constitution/amendment04/06.html, on 8th May 2010 Zalman, M. (2008). Criminal procedure: Constitution and society, 5th ed. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Good Essays

    In the case US v. Calandra (1974), Calandra was being questioned by the federal grand jury about loan sharking business. The reason the jury was asking these question were based on the evidence obtained at his company. Calandra didn’t want to answer any questions because he felt that the search of the company was an unlawful search and that it violated his fourth amendment exclusionary rule. The refusal to answer the grand jury, was what was being question about this case. Calandra felt like because of the exclusionary rule unde0r the fourth amendment he didn’t have to answer but he was wrong. The supreme court held that the exclusionary rule was only applicable in criminal courts and was not meant to be seen as a right but as a way to reduce unreasonable searches and seizures conducted by police ("Oyez: US v. Calandra," n.d.).…

    • 1275 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Chapter Four – The Exclusionary Rule Vicente Farias Jose Martinez The Exclusionary Rule  The Exclusionary Rule – Evidence obtained in violation of Fourth Amendment cannot be used at trial – The primary purpose of the exclusionary rule is to deter police misconduct – What other purpose does the exclusionary rule have? The Exclusionary Rule …

    • 280 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    In 1914, Weeks v. United States was decided by the Supreme Court. In Weeks, the Court made a landmark decision relating to illegal search and seizure by law enforcement called the Exclusionary Rule. The Exclusionary Rule provided that evidence “illegally seized by law enforcement officers in violation of a suspect’s right to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures cannot be used against the suspect in a criminal prosecution.” (Exclusionary Rule, 2010, p. 287). However, it was not until the 1961 case of Mapp v. Ohio that the Court made the Exclusionary Rule binding on the states…

    • 1210 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    To protect the American peoples 4th Amendment right “against unreasonable searches and seizures” from law enforcement using illegally seized evidence in a criminal trial against them, the exclusionary rule was created. The U.S. Supreme Court deemed any evidence illegally obtained inadmissible in a criminal trial, and any other evidence obtained during an illegal search and seizure inadmissible as well. This is known as the fruit of the poisonous tree doctrine.…

    • 197 Words
    • 1 Page
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    1100 CJ 2012 05s Feb

    • 874 Words
    • 4 Pages

    Under the rules of evidence, what happens when police improperly collect evidence? It can be declared inadmissible.…

    • 874 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    I find that the evidence would still be valid based on the “good faith” exception to the exclusionary rule. The good faith exception states “that If officers had a reasonable, good-faith belief that they were acting per legal authority, such as by relying on a search warrant that is later found to have been legally defective, the illegally seized evidence is admissible” (Busby, 2009). The good faith exception was established by a 6-3 U.S Supreme court decision in the United States v. Leon 468 U.S. 897 (1984). The majority opinion, as written by Bryon R. White, was that the exclusionary rule was established to deter law enforcements violations of the 4th amendment warranting against illegal search and seizure. Therefore “reliable physical evidence seized by officers reasonably relying on a warrant issued by a detached and neutral magistrate” did not violate the exclusionary rule and the evidence was to be admitted (Kaye, 2011). The good faith exception was reviewed and expanded in Arizona v. Evans 514 U.S. 1 (1995), a case that I feel directly correlates to my decision reference the admissibility of the evidence in the example given. In Arizona v. Evans an officer conducts a legal traffic stop. Upon running the driver’s license the officer discovers an outstanding warrant for arrest. Pursuant to the arrest a search was conduct and marijuana discovered. When charging Evan’s when possession the officers discovered that the warrant had been quashed. In a 7-2 decision, the U.S. Supreme Court determined that this was not a violation of Evan’s 4th Amendment rights since the evidence, though obtained based on an illegal warrant, was legal based on the good faith…

    • 425 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    The purpose of the exclusionary rule is to exclude evidence obtained in violation of a criminal defendant’s Fourth Amendment rights. It is also a right to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures by the Fourth Amendment. Some exceptions of the exclusionary rule is barring the use at trial of evidence obtained pursuant to an unlawful search and seizure. Some other exceptions to the exclusionary rule are: (1) a second, unpoisoned/untainted source had a major rule in finding the evidence, (2) the evidence would have been discovered…

    • 803 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    I am usually one of those people that believes in the law and that believes that rules are in place for a reason. I am well aware of the Exclusionary Rule and the Poisonous Fruit Doctrine however, these are two things that I don't believe in. According to the Exclusionary Rule, any evidence obtained without a warrant or Constitutional justification needs to be excluded from any case records. (FindLaw, 2017). While the Poisonous Fruit Doctrine indicates that the court may exclude not only the evidence itself that was seized in violation of the Constitution but also any other evidence that was derived from the illegal search. (FindLaw, 2017). This doctrine allows for many criminals to be set free on a technicality. We are all well aware that…

    • 489 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Exclusionary Rule

    • 1042 Words
    • 5 Pages

    Evidence obtained by a police officer in reasonable reliance on a search warrant that is subsequently found invalid may be admissible. United States v. Leon, 468 U.S. 897 (1984). It is necessary that a reasonably well-trained officer would have believed that the warrant was valid. This has come to be known as the “good faith” or Leon exception to the exclusionary rule. Many states, however, have rejected this exception.…

    • 1042 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Exclusionary Rule

    • 355 Words
    • 2 Pages

    The Exclusionary Rule was designed to exclude evidence obtained in violation of a criminal defendant’s Fourth Amendment rights. The Fourth Amendment protects against unreasonable search and seizures by law enforcement personnel. If the search of a criminal suspect is searched unreasonable, the evidence obtained in the search will be excluded from trial.…

    • 355 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    Exclusionary Rule

    • 637 Words
    • 3 Pages

    Now over time the Supreme Court has looked at the exclusionary rule a number of times and as the supreme court became more conservative in the 1970s and the 1080s, they began to carve out exceptions to the exclusionary rule. The classic exception come from a case called United States verses Leon, and it is called the "good faith" exception. What that means is if the police officer obtains evidence in a good faith belief that they have complied with your constitutional rights, that evidence can still be used against you even if we later find out that there was a problem with the search and seizure. So if the police go to a judge, obtain a warrant, search your home and find drugs, they find out a week later that there was a problem with the warrant and that technically it was an illegal search. The drugs still come in against you because the officers acted in a good faith belief that they had played by the rules. The Supreme Court has repeatedly said that the exclusionary rule is to prevent us against rogue police officers not against clerical errors or errors on behalf of the…

    • 637 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    The exclusionary rule is a law that prohibits the use of illegally obtained evidence in a criminal trial. The U.S. Supreme Court developed the rule to discourage police from violating the Fourth Amendment right to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures. A lot of police feel as when they have their badge on there able to do anything and everything which isn't fair to the everyday citizen.…

    • 548 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Exclusionary Rule

    • 326 Words
    • 1 Page

    Deterrence rationale is “the rationale for the exclusionary rule that rests upon the view that, to deter officers from disregarding the constitution, it is necessary to exclude from evidence at trail the evidentiary fruits of illegal police conduct.” (Garland, 2011,p.265) When it comes the applications for the exclusionary rule, “judges are not allowed to be accomplices to illegality by allowing the introduction of illegally obtained evidence.” (Garland, 2011,p.265) The courts have established what is called the “good faith exception” and this is where it was believed that the officers had probable cause to get a warrant.…

    • 326 Words
    • 1 Page
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    The exclusionary rule is defined as “The principle based on federal Constitutional Law that evidence illegally seized by law enforcement officers in violation of a suspect 's right to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures cannot be used against the suspect in a criminal prosecution.” (Farlex, 2011) The rule was fashioned in the early 1900s, before then any relevant evidence was admissible in a criminal trial, no matter what manner it was obtained. In 1914, the case of Weeks v. United States, a federal agent entered the home of Fremont Weeks and seized papers which were used to convict him of transporting lottery ticking through the mail. The search was conducted without a warrant, and on appeal the court held the way the papers were seized from Weeks’ residence directly violated his Fourth Amendment rights. Weeks’s conviction was reversed in the first application of the exclusionary rule. Even so, the rule was devised to deter police misconduct; it was not intended to be a cure all for every Fourth Amendment violation. In 1984 the courts established the Good Faith exception to Fourth Amendment violations in United Sates v. Leon. The Good Faith exception basically states that evidence obtained through an honest mistake would not be excluded from trial if the law enforcement officer, although mistaken, acted reasonably.…

    • 786 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Better Essays

    Evidence

    • 2374 Words
    • 10 Pages

    The exclusionary rule is the rule that defines the circumstances in which a court will exclude evidence on the grounds that it has been obtained in violation of the accused’s constitutional rights.…

    • 2374 Words
    • 10 Pages
    Better Essays