chapter four – the exclusionary rule
DESCRIPTION
Chapter Four – The Exclusionary Rule. Rolando V. del Carmen. The Exclusionary Rule. The Exclusionary Rule Evidence obtained in violation of Fourth Amendment cannot be used at trial The primary purpose of the exclusionary rule is to deter police misconduct - PowerPoint PPT PresentationTRANSCRIPT
Chapter Four – The Exclusionary Rule
Rolando V. del Carmen
The Exclusionary Rule
The Exclusionary Rule– Evidence obtained in violation of Fourth
Amendment cannot be used at trial– The primary purpose of the exclusionary rule is
to deter police misconduct– What other purpose does the exclusionary rule
have?
The Exclusionary Rule
A Judge-Made Rule– Some maintain that the exclusionary rule is
Judge-made.– Some argue that the exclusionary rule
originates from the Constitution and is beyond the reach of Congress
The Exclusionary Rule
Historical Development– In Federal Courts
• U.S. Origin
• Silver Platter Doctrine
– In State Courts
The Exclusionary Rule
The Exclusionary Rule Applied to State Criminal Prosecutions: Mapp v. Ohio – Significance– Differences from Wolf
The Exclusionary Rule
Procedures for Invoking the Exclusionary Rule– In Pretrial Motions and Motions During the
Trial• Motion to Suppress the Evidence
• Burden of Proof on the Accused
• Burden of Proof on the Prosecutor
The Exclusionary Rule
Procedures for Invoking the Exclusionary Rule– On Appeal
• Evidence is admitted
• Evidence is excluded
The Exclusionary Rule
Procedures for Invoking the Exclusionary Rule– In Habeas Corpus Proceedings
• Seeks release of defendant because of a constitutional rights violation before or during trial
The Exclusionary Rule
Procedures for Invoking the Exclusionary Rule– “Standing” and the Exclusion of Illegally
Seized Evidence• What is “standing”?
• Exclusionary rule can only be used by the person who’s rights were violated
– Minnesota v. Carter (1998)
The Exclusionary Rule
Determining What is Inadmissible – Illegally Seized Evidence
• Contraband
• Fruits of the crime
• Instruments of the crime
• “Mere Evidence”
The Exclusionary Rule
Determining What is Inadmissible – Fruit of the Poisonous Tree
Illegal Police Act
Evidence illegally
obtained is inadmissible.
Evidence obtained from illegally
obtained evidence. This is fruit of the
poisonous tree.
The Exclusionary Rule
Exceptions to the Exclusionary Rule – The Good Faith Exceptions
• When the Error Was Committed by the Judge or Magistrate, Not by the Police: The Sheppard and Leon Cases
• When the Error Was Committed by a Court Employee: Arizona v. Evans
• When the Police Erred but Honestly and Reasonably Believed That the Information They Gave to the Magistrate When Obtaining the Warrant Was Accurate: Maryland v. Garrison
The Exclusionary Rule
Exceptions to the Exclusionary Rule – The Inevitable Discovery Exception
• Nix v. Williams (1984)
The Exclusionary Rule
Exceptions to the Exclusionary Rule – The Purged Taint Exception
• Wong Sun v. United States (1963)
• Brown v. Illinois (1975)
• Taylor v. Alabama (1982)
The Exclusionary Rule
Exceptions to the Exclusionary Rule – The Independent Source Exception
• United States v. Crews (1980)
• State v. O’Bremski (1967)
The Exclusionary Rule
Procedures to Which the Rule Does Not Apply– In Private Searches– In Grand Jury Investigations– In Sentencing– In Violations of Agency Rules Only– In Noncriminal Proceedings– In Parole Revocation Hearings
The Exclusionary Rule
Arguments in Support of the Exclusionary Rule– It deters violations of constitutional
rights by police and prosecutors– It manifests society’s refusal to
convict lawbreakers by relying on official lawlessness
– It results in the freeing of the guilty in a relatively small proportion of cases
The Exclusionary Rule
Arguments in Support of the Exclusionary Rule– It has led to more professionalism among the
police and increased attention to training programs
– It preserves the integrity of the judicial system– It prevents the government from profiting from
its wrongdoing– It protects the constitutional right to privacy
The Exclusionary Rule
Arguments Against the Exclusionary Rule– It is wrong to make society pay for an officer’s
mistake.– It excludes the most credible, probative kinds of
evidence.– It discourages internal disciplinary efforts by law
enforcement agencies.– It encourages police to perjure themselves in an
effort to get the evidence admitted.– It diminishes respect for the judicial process and
generates disrespect for the law and the administration of justice.
The Exclusionary Rule
Arguments Against the Exclusionary Rule– There is no proof that the exclusionary rule deters
police misconduct.– Only the United States uses the exclusionary rule; other
countries do not.– It has no effect on those large areas of police activity
that do not result in criminal prosecutions. – The rule is not based on the Constitution; it is only an
invention of the Court.– It does not punish the individual police officer whose
illegal conduct led to the exclusion of the evidence.– Justice Scalia says, “It has been ‘universally rejected’
by other countries.”
The Exclusionary Rule
Alternatives to the Exclusionary Rule– An independent review board in the
executive branch.– A civil tort action against the government.– A hearing separate from the main criminal
trial but before the same judge or jury.– Adoption of an expanded good faith
exception.– Adoption of the British system.
The Exclusionary Rule
The Future of the Exclusionary Rule: It is Here to Stay