Exclusionary Rule Arguments

820 Words 4 Pages
Question 1: Discuss the arguments for and against the exclusionary rule. Be sure to provide examples and explain your position on the exclusionary rule.

Answer: The exclusionary rule is “A judicial rule that makes evidence obtained in violation of the U.S. Constitution, state, or federal laws, or court rules inadmissible” (Gardner & Anderson, 2016, p. 214). As a part of the exclusionary rule, there is a doctrine called the fruit of the poisonous tress, also known as derivative evidence (Gardner & Anderson, 2016). The fruit of the poisonous tree rule excludes evidence that is collected indirectly during police misconduct (Gardner & Anderson, 2016). Such evidence will be excluded as a result of this doctrine if the evidence illegally collected
…show more content…
The independent source doctrine applies if illegally obtained evidence is also found by legal police conduct (Gardner & Anderson, 2016). Evidence can be admissible if discovered properly and independent, and is not contaminated by the first improper police misconduct (Gardner & Anderson, 2016). In the Murray v, United States (1988) case, the independent doctrine was applied because the agents unlawfully entered a warehouse where marijuana was found, but then obtained a search warrant therefore the evidence was deemed admissible (Gardner & Anderson, 2016). The inevitable discovery rule is applied when “illegally discovered evidence would certainly have been discovered legally” (Gardner & Anderson, 2016, p. …show more content…
For example, in the case of Wong Sun V. United States (1963), Wong Sun was coerced to make incriminating statements after agents illegally entered his laundry, but he was later released (Gardner & Anderson, 2016). He eventually confessed voluntarily to transporting heroin, and at his trial he wanted his confession to not be used as evidence because of the improper police conduct (Gardner & Anderson, 2016). But, the U.S Supreme Court stated his confession could be used in court because of the time that has passed between the illegal entry and confession that ultimately eliminated the misconduct (Gardner & Anderson,

Related Documents