The Exclusionary Rule The Fourth Amendment History of the Exclusionary Rule Deontological Defenses of the Rule Consequentialist Defenses Objections Alternatives.

Slides:

Advertisements

Similar presentations

Due Process and Search and Seizure- 4 th and 14 th Amendments.

Advertisements

The Bill of Rights, 2nd and 4th Amendments

Teaching American History: Moot Courts and Constitutional Concepts.

Section 3 Introduction-1

The Bill of Rights and the Criminal Trial Process.

Section 10.2 The Exclusionary Rule Section 10.2 The Exclusionary Rule.

Exclusionary Rule ACG 6935/4939.

Suspects Rights Amendments 4, 5 and 6. 4 th Amendment The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable.

Law enforcement officers conduct searches every day in an effort to find evidence that can be seized and used in court to prosecute people who have violated.

Cases and Terms – Chapter 8 – Rights of the Accused Module 8 Amendments 4 -7.

POLICE LAW & SOCIETY What are the distinct characteristics of police in U.S. society? Police play multiple roles Law prescribes parameters of police practice.

Part 3, Bill of Rights.

The Fourth and Fifth Amendments How do they protect our rights?

The Bill of Rights Jessica Seo, Jay Kim, and Nensi Karaj.

Rights of Suspects The Fourth Amendment The Fifth Amendment.

1 Disclosing and Suppressing Evidence Chapter 12.

UNIT 5 AMERICAN GOVERNMENT. LESSON PAGES How do the 4 th and 5 th Amendments protect against unreasonable law enforcement procedures? Objective:

Winning, until proven guilty …. Searches and Seizures The Fourth Amendment protects from unreasonable searches and seizures Searches must be conducted.

Unit Five Lesson 31 How do the Fourth and Fifth Amendments Protect Against Unreasonable Law Enforcement Procedures.

Rights of the Accused Chapter 5, Theme D. Incorporation  Until the Warren Court of the 1960s, most rights of accused found in BOR only applied to the.

Our Court System Terms, procedures, and ideas you need to know.

Call to Order These three officers were accused of taking two Baltimore teens out to the county, taking their shoes and cellphone batteries, and leaving.

Introduction to Constitutional Law Unit 4. CJ140-02A – Introduction to Constitutional Law Unit 4: The Fourth Amendment CJ140-02A– Class 4 Part 1.

Two competing options: (1) Military tribunals / commissions Most recently, created by Executive Order in Nov 2001 Secretary of Defense ordered to establish.

CJ227 Criminal Procedure Welcome to our Seminar!!! (We will begin shortly) Tonight – Unit 1 (Chapter 1 – Historical dev. of the law and judicial systems)

PROCEDURES IN THE JUSTICE SYSTEM, 8 th ed. Roberson, Wallace, and Stuckey PRENTICE HALL ©2007 Pearson Education, Inc. Upper Saddle River, NJ

Chapter 2 Legal Aspects of Investigation © 2009 McGraw-Hill Higher Education. All rights reserved. LEARNING OBJECTIVES Explain the historical evolution.

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE Unit 2 - Week 2 Ann Marie Lampariello-Perez professor.

The Bill of Rights The First Fundamental Changes of the Constitution.

Amendments in Action Search and Seizure. The 4 th Amendment “The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against.

4. Legal Limitations on Police behavior: a)Police are authorized to use coercive and intrusive measures in enforcing the law  Legal use of force = defining.

THE 4 TH AMENDMENT The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall.

 What is the exclusionary rule  Explain stop and frisk  What is the plain view doctrine  What did Miranda v Arizona require police to do  What happens.

Chapter Four – The Exclusionary Rule

“The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated;

THE BILL OF RIGHTS REASONS AND CONTENTS. REASONS CREATED RIGHTS WERE NOT LISTED IN THE ORIGINAL CONSTITUTION ANTI-FEDERALISTS WANTED A GUARANTEE THAT.

According to the Bill of Rights, you have the freedom of speech which means that you have the right to practice your religion › The rules are a little.

The Bill of Rights and the Criminal Trial Process.

Ann Marie Perez Professor CRIMINAL PROCEDURE WEEK 1 - UNIT 1.

Rights of Criminal Defendants

Strip search th Amendment “The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches.

4 th Amendment Timothy Bian, Myris Kramsch, Mazen Elhosseiny, Daniel Alday, John Scott, Kartik Raju.

Due Process Amendments What is due process? Due process, for the people of the United States, refers to how laws are enforced why laws are.

AP U.S. GOVERNMENT & POLITICS – Civil Liberties Civil Liberties part 3.

Axia College of University of Phoenix ADJ 275 Criminal Procedures Exclusionary Rule.

Fourth Amendment And Probable Cause. By the end of this presentation you should be able to understand; ◦Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution ◦How.

The Bill of Rights and the Criminal Trial Process.

Arrest and Detainment How do you know you’ve been arrested?

“Ryan Rose, you are under arrest!” What rights do you have? Look it up.

Judicial Branch Basics and “Due Process”. Basic Structure of the Judicial Branch Supreme Court (original and appellate jurisdiction) 13 Circuit Courts.

4 th, 5 th,6 th, 8 th, and 14 th Amendments (Due Process) Due Process of Law – This clause in the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments is there to prevent the.

1 st Amendment: Freedom of Expression “Congress shall make no law.

Unit 4 Seminar. Tell me what the Miranda warning is and what it means to you.

The Bill of Rights and Search and Seizure. The students will be able to: 1. Discuss the amendments involved from the Bill of Rights that pertain to obtaining.

Limiting the Right of Search

The 4th Amendment Notes 5-3.

Amendments in Action Search and Seizure.

Criminal Investigation and the Law

Part of the 4th Amendment

The Bill of Rights and the Criminal Trial Process

Amendments in Action Search and Seizure.

The 4th Amendment Notes 5-3.

Fourth Amendment And Probable Cause.

2.2 Civil Liberties 4th 5th, 6th, and 8th Amendments.

4th Amendment According to the Fourth Amendment, the people have a right “to be secure in their persons, houses, papers and effects, against unreasonable.

Criminal Procedure: Theory and Practice, 2d.

The Bill of Rights and the Criminal Trial Process

How does this Constitutional amendment protect Americans?

Bill of Rights Amendments 4-6.

Ch. 3-1 Criminal Procedure and the Constitution

Presentation transcript:

The Exclusionary Rule The Fourth Amendment History of the Exclusionary Rule Deontological Defenses of the Rule Consequentialist Defenses Objections Alternatives

The Fourth Amendment in its Original Context Primarily concerned with general warrants issued to tax and customs officials. Assumed that people would not tolerate warrantless searches. No organized police forces: victims brought charges against their attackers.

The Fourth Amendment The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers and effects, against unreasonabe searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oaths or affirmations, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Madison’s Original “The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers and effects, against unreasonabe searches and seizures, shall not be violated by Warrants issued without probable cause, or not supported....” I.e., the protection was against general warrants, not against warrantless searches.

History of the Exclusionary Rule Weeks v. U. S. (1914): exclusionary rule applied to illegal searches by federal officers. Wolf v. Colorado (1949): 4th amendment, but not the exclusionary rule, applied to states. Mapp v. Ohio (1961): exclusionary rule applied to states

Linkletter v. Wallace (1965): exclusionary rule not to be applied retroactively

Deontological Defenses of the Exclusionary Rule Seizing the evidence and accepting the evidence in court are parts of a single governmental action: illegality of first part contaminates the second. Admitting the evidence is inevitably to condone and encourage illegal searches.

The government must set an example of scrupulous abiding by the law. The courts honor and underscore the value of the 4th amendment by paying such a high price to protect it. Exclusion asserts judicial independence from the executive branch.

Consequentialist Defenses Deters illegal searches and seizures. Forces police and prosecutors to develop procedures and training regimens that make violations rare. No other alternative is available to the courts. The Bill of Rights is addressed to the courts -- they have no other control over activities of police.

Objections to the Rule Little or no empirical evidence that it actually deters police illegality. Most police work is not intended to result in prosecutions. Causes considerable delay and waste of judicial resources. Between 20-35% of court time is spent on motions to suppress evidence. Provides absolutely no protection to innocent victims of illegal searches.

Encourages perjury on the part of police, to cover up technical violations. Grants police the unlimited ower to grant immunity to any criminal, by deliberately engaging in an illegal search. Could lead to corruption. Forestalls the development of alternative protections of 4th amendment rights.

Alternatives Prosecution of police for trespass. Prosecutors, juries are reluctant. Civil tort action against officers. In many states, they enjoy immunity. Administrative discipline by police internal affairs. Not objective?

More Alternatives Independent, citizen review board, with disciplinary powers. No experience in U. S. Charging police under federal civil rights statutes. No experience.

The Leon Decision: "Good Faith" Exceptions Evidence is admissible if a "reasonably trained" police officer would have had good reason to believe that the search was legal (e.g., that the warrant was valid). Standard is objective: doesn't depend on what the officer actually believed.

Objections to Leon Encourages a "see-no-evil" approach on part of officers: they are OK so long as they don't encounter any evidence or advice that the search will not be legal. Encourages "magistrate shopping". Can use evidence, no matter how unreasonable the judge was in granting the warrant.

Interpreting the Bill of Rights Learned Hand argued, in using history, we look for "general purposes, not specific practices." Profound differences in historical context. When the Bill of Rights was passed, there were no police, no wiretapping, no eavesdropping devices.

Finding the “General Purposes” What is the appropriate level of generality? Anti-federalists were primarily concerned with revenue collectors, not crime investigators. What to do when the Constitution provides no enforcement mechanism, or relies (implicitly) on one (popular resistance) that has proved inadequate?

The Fifth Amendment “No person... shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself,...” If taken literally, applies only to criminal trials, not to grand juries, civil trials, congressional hearings. What does “compelled” mean? May prosecutors point out the failure?

Does Ideology Determine Interpretation? Contrast the expansive interpretations given to the 1st, 4th and 5th amendments with the the very restrictive interpretations given to the 2nd and 10th. Is there a right answer? How great is the indeterminacy? Who should decide?