Exclusionary Rule: Use Of Illegally Obtained Evidence In A Criminal Trial

Decent Essays
The definition or exclusionary rule “is a law that protects the use of illegally obtained evidence in a criminal trial.” The exclusionary rule falls under the fourth amendment which protects every individual from unlawful searches and seizure. This rule is based on the constitutional law, it was made, so that evidence that was collected “illegally” cannot be used to prosecute a suspect.
To begin with, if a police officers want to obtain a warrant, they must have reasonable causes to do a search legally. When a police officer conducts an illegal search, they are punished by the police station they work for and in some cases other jurisdictions. When an individual has been arrested illegally or had their privacy violated, then the officer who

Related Documents

  • Decent Essays

    Rehnquist delivered the opinion of the 7-2 majority. The Court held that the Supreme Court has jurisdiction to review cases from state courts that deal primarily with federal law. The Court also held that the Fourth Amendment was designed to protect against intrusions into a home or onto private property, or the conduct of police officers. The exclusionary rule therefore does not apply to the conduct of judicial officers. Justice Sandra Day O’Connor wrote a concurring opinion where she argued that the majority’s decision does not allow any evidence that is the result of a clerical error.…

    • 390 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Superior Essays

    Case Brief Of Us Vs Leon

    • 878 Words
    • 4 Pages

    The exclusionary rule of the Fourth Amendment should have been modified to permit the introduction of the evidence that was obtained in the reasonable good-faith belief that search and seizure was in accord with the Fourth Amendment. (White, Justice) Yes, The exclusionary rule of the Fourth Amendment should have been modified to permit the introduction of evidence that was seized in the reasonable good-faith belief that the search and seizure were in accord with the Fourth Amendment. The officer’s reliance for the warrant must have been objectively reasonable.…

    • 878 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Sierra Fischer Exam 3 Answer According to the Fourth Amendment, an officer must have probable cause or a reasonable suspicion that a crime has been committed in order to search and seize an individual. Speeding, as well as having tinted windows and a taillight being out is enough reasonable suspicicion to pull Lil Flet over and inspect the car. As breaking the law gives an officer a reasonable belief that there may be evidence of a crime located within the vehicle. Additionally, identifying the smell of a drug is enough grounds for a search as it gives the officer probable cause.…

    • 1098 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Da Vs Harris Case Study

    • 575 Words
    • 3 Pages

    Police officers did not have the right to approach the porch of Jardines’ house to find evidence, this is know as exclusionary rule,improperly gathered evidence may not be introduce in a criminal…

    • 575 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    The purpose for this rule can be looked at like a way for law enforcements to conduct searches and seizures that do not violate the Fourth Amendment and individuals that have had their rights violated. This legal rule first made its appearance during the U.S. Supreme court case Weeks v. United States (1914). Freemont Weeks was arrested under suspicion of using the U.S. mail to transmit lottery tickets. Once he was arrested, officers searched his office without a warrant and found evidence of what he was being suspected of. They also searched Weeks home without a warrant, but found no evidence.…

    • 937 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Elizabeth, I do concede that Dripps model of the contingent exclusionary rule is fascinating; yet, it is my opinion that there are pros and cons. It is without doubt that the present exclusionary rule is controversial. I also concede that there isn’t a need to completely re-invent the wheel. Conversely, Dripps argues in regards of the contingent suppression order in which prosecutors would have to choose between accepting exclusion of evidence obtained through infractions of the Fourth Amendment or accepting the imposition of a damages judgment obtained through infractions of the Fourth Amendment or accepting the imposition of a damages judgment against the state under an administration of statutory damages (Tipton, 2010).…

    • 328 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Decent Essays

    Fourth Amendment Warrants

    • 169 Words
    • 1 Pages

    As followed, searches incident to arrest do not require a warrant if the search is in radius of the suspect. The officer may search the surrounding area for illegal contraband or weapons. Ultimately, to protect the officers around as well as to collect valuable…

    • 169 Words
    • 1 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Improved Essays

    In the United States v. Leon case, the Fourth Amendment exclusionary rule should not be applied so as to bar the use in the prosecution's case in chief of evidence obtained by officers acting in reasonable reliance on a search warrant issued by a detached and neutral magistrate but ultimately found to be invalid. Pp. 905-925. (United States v. Leon, (1984) No. 82- 1771.)…

    • 327 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Decent Essays

    After having failed in the previous attempt to enter the house, the officers forcibly go in using a purported search warrant and searched the home in which crude materials were found. The rule of law in scrutiny was the violation of the American Constitution as explained in the Fourth Amendment. The law termed all evidence collected in violation of this amendment to be unacceptable and irrelevant in the court proceedings. Question…

    • 711 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Improved Essays

    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).…

    • 820 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Great Essays

    Moot Court Case

    • 1647 Words
    • 7 Pages

    DAVID FALLSBAUER’S RIGHTS UNDER THE FOURTH AMENDMENT WERE VIOLATED BY THE POLICE OFFICERS, BECAUSE WHEN FACED WITH AMBIGUITY REGARDING THE A THIRD PARTY’S CONSENT TO SEARCH THEY FAILED TO MAKE A FURTHER INQUIRY. BY DOING SO, THE OFFICERS VIOLATED DAVID’S RIGHT TO PRIVACY. The primary question before this Court is whether police officers must make a further inquiry when faced with an ambiguity regarding a third party’s consent to search. The Federal Circuit Courts of Appeals have taken different views when deciding the actions a police officer must take when faced with an ambiguity pertaining to third party consent. It is crucial to our society that a person’s right to privacy is protected and able to be exercised.…

    • 1647 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Great Essays
  • Improved Essays

    “The Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution provides, "[t]he right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized”( Interests Protected law.cornell.edu). Probable cause is if there something that's easily to tell that something's wrong or not right. Like if it's a murder scene or they can smell drugs or smell alcohol in the car. But very many cases are being dismissed because of the failure of the use of a search warrant. Even though that really isn’t a good thing it assures you because of the fourth amendment you can't go to prison because it’s a cop's word against a civilians.…

    • 618 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Fourth Amendment In Texas

    • 492 Words
    • 2 Pages

    As well the court also stated that detaining a person to require him to identify himself with lack of evidence against him/her violates their Fourth Amendment right. The Fourth Amendment requires such action,or that the seizure should be carried out pursuant to plan embodying explicit,neutral limitations of individual officers. In other words, a police officer can’t arrest you,detain you,or search you without a search warrant or an arrest warnat. Though there are some expectations on getting search or being detained,like for instances if a police officer asks your permission to search in your belongings and you agree then that’s not considered an intrusion of your privacy because you allowed him/her to search in your belongings. Same goes for being arrested because in order to be charged with a crime police officers must have reasonable suspicion and enough evidence to charge you with that crime.…

    • 492 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Arrest warrants are issued to allow the police to identify and locate a person, or persons. These persons are usually those who have been previous arrest, released on bail, but then fail to show up to court after their release, in contrast a search warrant allows the police to enter into a promise, in search of evidence or contraband that may be used in an upcoming trial. In order to take possession of an item, and that property to be searched it must be specifically listed in the search warrant. The police are limited to only what is indicated in the warrant after its approved by a judge. ( John Worrall. 2013).…

    • 771 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays