NCJ Number
86279
Journal
Loyola University of Chicago Law Journal Volume: 13 Issue: 3 Dated: (Spring 1982) Pages: 373-403
Date Published
1982
Length
31 pages
Annotation
An analysis of the application of the exclusionary rule in probation revocation hearings concludes that both constitutional principles and rehabilitation goals mandate the application of the exclusionary rule in these hearings.
Abstract
The majority of Federal and State courts deny applying the exclusionary rule during probation revocation proceedings. As a result, the government can make affirmative use of evidence which has been obtained by unlawful police conduct. Most of the reported decisions involve the prosecutor's affirmative use of such evidence against a probationer whose fourth amendment rights against unreasonable searches and seizures have been violated. However, applying the exclusionary rule in probation revocation hearings best serves the rehabilitative purpose of the probation system by treating probationers fairly and by showing that misconduct from either the probationer or the police will not be tolerated. The application of the rule also serves the exclusionary rule's two purposes: deterring the violation of fourth amendment rights and maintaining judicial integrity. The denial of the rule in a probation revocation hearing is an unconstitutional act which should not be overlooked in the name of law enforcement. A total of 134 case notes are included.