According to the majority of the Supreme Justice’s an illegal stop is justified and the exclusionary rules do not apply if the suspect has an outstanding arrest warrant and that the misconduct was not blatant. In other words, “the exclusion outweighs its benefits”. In addition, calculating the distance from the arrest to the residence and its further analysis is sufficient enough to justify the arrest and clarify the evidence as admissible (suffiecntly attenuated). In this case, the exclusionary rule did not help Edward Strieff. The question is whether the Supreme Court would have felt the same way, if the strife did not have an outstanding warrant. In that case, randomly stopping people coming out of a house that is “supposedly” committing
