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
Premium Crime Law Police
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
Premium Supreme Court of the United States Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution United States Constitution
A major case that helped further clarify the exclusionary rule in the justice system was the Davis v. The United States. The case regarded the admissibility of evidence obtained through unconstitutional searches and seizures derived from the fourth amendment. The implications for law enforcement and prosecution were also clarified by the exclusionary rule during the trial. Case Background Willie Davis was stopped by officers at a routine vehicle stop where he was asked for his name and decided to
Premium
The Exclusionary Rule was put in place to prevent the government from using evidence that was gathered illegally in violation of the United States Constitution. Evidence that was obtained from an unreasonable search and seizure that violates the Fourth Amendment or Fifth Amendment are found admissible in court under the Exclusionary Rule‚ if no exceptions apply. The establishment of the Exclusionary Rule was due to the rulings of several Supreme Court cases where it was found unconstitutional for
Premium Exclusionary rule Supreme Court of the United States United States Constitution
Should the exclusionary rule be abolished? My answer to that is no. The exclusionary rule is one of the fundamental ways the rights of the all people are protected. Mainly the rule is to protect you from police power. If the exclusionary rule was abolished you will more than likely see police brutality on the rise. Officer’s‚ Detectives‚ etc will cut corners and otherwise ignore the basic rights of the people they serve. If the rule was abolished we will see sometimes innocent people put in
Premium United States Constitution Law Exclusionary rule
-Homeopathic remedies allow the body to heal itself without any harmful affects that might come from the use of conventional drugs -The history of homeopathy dates as far back as Hippocrates in the 5th century. It was also used by Egyptians. -Most people take medicine in strong doses so the drug will produce the opposite condition of what they have. -But Homeopathy works in the opposite way. -The doses are very diluted. -Many people like to use homeopathic remedies because they
Premium Alternative medicine Allergy
Should the Exclusionary Rule be Abolished? Since the introduction of the exclusionary rule‚ many debates have raged about whether or not it should be in place in our justice system. The exclusionary rule was set in place to protect citizens’ Fourth Amendment rights against illegal searches and seizures. As a result of the induction of this rule‚ law enforcement throughout the country has been affected and changed. Personally‚ I do not believe that the exclusionary rule should not be excluded from
Premium
Basically the Exclusionary rule as set forth by the US Supreme Court states that any evidence obtained by police through search and seizure‚ arrest‚ interrogations and stop and frisk situations or any other evidence despite its relevance can be excluded as evidence. The Weeks v. United States was basically the origin of the Exclusionary Rule in 1914. In Weeks v United States Mrs‚ Weeks was arrested for shoplifting and attempted to get a note to her husband about this. Law enforcement went to the
Premium Supreme Court of the United States Exclusionary rule Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution
The Exclusionary Rule and Civil Liability Mark McCormick Kaplan University CJ-299 Professor Donna Yohman August 30‚ 2014 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
Premium Supreme Court of the United States United States Constitution Exclusionary rule
The exclusionary rule is for prohibiting illegal evidence in court‚ this can be a deciding factor in most cases. An example of this is‚ they can’t fake‚ or plant evidence.They have to have solid concrete evidence.This rule is part of the fourth amendment‚ which a lot of people take seriously‚ these are rights given to all Americans. I agree with this because‚ everything needs to be done in a proper manner. If the evidence leaves the chain of custody or is collected in an unlawful manner this can
Premium United States Constitution Supreme Court of the United States Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution