NCJ Number
100738
Date Published
1986
Length
4 pages
Annotation
This study guide for the ''Crime File' videotape on the exclusionary rule defines the exclusionary rule, reviews its history, summarizes the pros and cons of the debate surrounding it, and notes recent U.S. Supreme Court decisions pertaining to it.
Abstract
The exclusionary rule prohibits the admission of evidence obtained through an illegal search and seizure. In Weeks v. United States (1914), the U.S. Supreme Court first ruled that a fourth amendment violation by itself justifies the exclusion of evidence in Federal courts. In Mapp v. Ohio (1961), the Court ruled that the exclusionary rule extended to State courts under constitutional due process guarantees. Justifications for the rule are that it protects the constitutional privacy right, upholds the judiciary's integrity by precluding judicial acquiescence in fourth amendment violations, and deters police misconduct. Opponents of the rule argue that it is not an effective deterrent to illegal searches and seizures, it corrupts the administration of justice, and the rule is beyond the constitutional authority of the courts to invent. In 1984, the U.S. Supreme Court created a ''good faith' exception to the exclusionary rule in the cases of United States v. Leon and Massachusetts v. Sheppard. The Court ruled that evidence obtained in a good faith search based on a warrant presumed by officers to be valid could not be excluded on the basis of a subsequent finding that the warrant was invalid. 19 references.