The Evolution of the Exclusionary Rule Essay

1740 Words Oct 19th, 2013 7 Pages
The Evolution of the Exclusionary Rule
A Historical Analysis And How It Stand Today

April Herald
Criminal Justice
From historical analysis, this work highlights key cases that have influenced the evolution of the Exclusionary rule and where it stands today. The purpose of this paper is to inform people of the importance of our constitutional rights, especially the fourth amendment when concerning a criminal prosecution. The exclusionary rule is set in place to ensure justice be served and the accused are treated equally. If you have ever found yourself with a criminal status you should be sure that you were or are treated equal and that you know the law. There has been numerous cases that can be used to
…show more content…
In 1904, another case appeared before the Court. Adams v. New York2 dealt with a man convicted of illegal gambling. A warrant for illegal gambling paraphernalia had been executed by the police. The conviction was the result of seizure of private papers. The conviction was based on the authority and reason to establish the guild and limited the thoroughness of reviewing how the evidence was obtained. This case was a setback for Exclusionary Rule.
Ten years later, the Court for the first time denied evidence seized without a warrant from a private home as a Fourth Amendment violation. In the 1914 case Weeks v. United
States3, the Court unanimously ruled that the Fourth Amendment protects only against “unreasonable search and seizure” by a federal officer in federal court. Previously, the Court had ruled in Adams that evidence seized without a warrant could be introduced in court if the defense counsel did not file for the return of the evidence before the trial began. In this case such a filing had been made by the defense.4 Because the evidence should have been returned before trial under Adams, the Court held that the government violated the Fourth Amendment when it introduced the evidence at trial. The Exclusionary Rule’s Further Development
In the case of Silverthorn Lumber Co. v. United States, 19205, the Court ruled that returning illegally seized evidence, while still facing prosecution based upon that evidence

Related Documents