1. Chapter Four – The Exclusionary Rule
Rolando V. del Carmen

2. 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?

3. 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

4. Historical Development
The Exclusionary Rule
Historical Development
In Federal Courts
U.S. Origin
Silver Platter Doctrine
In State Courts

5. The Exclusionary Rule
The Exclusionary Rule Applied to State Criminal Prosecutions: Mapp v. Ohio
Significance
Differences from Wolf

6. 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

7. Procedures for Invoking the Exclusionary Rule
On Appeal
Evidence is admitted
Evidence is excluded

8. Procedures for Invoking the Exclusionary Rule
In Habeas Corpus Proceedings
Seeks release of defendant because of a constitutional rights violation before or during trial

9. 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)

10. Determining What is Inadmissible
The Exclusionary Rule
Determining What is Inadmissible
Illegally Seized Evidence
Contraband
Fruits of the crime
Instruments of the crime
“Mere Evidence”

11. Evidence illegally obtained is inadmissible.
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.

12. 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

13. Exceptions to the Exclusionary Rule
The Inevitable Discovery Exception
Nix v. Williams (1984)

14. Exceptions to the Exclusionary Rule
The Purged Taint Exception
Wong Sun v. United States (1963)
Brown v. Illinois (1975)
Taylor v. Alabama (1982)

15. Exceptions to the Exclusionary Rule
The Independent Source Exception
United States v. Crews (1980)
State v. O’Bremski (1967)

16. Procedures to Which the Rule Does Not Apply
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

17. 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

18. 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

19. 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.

20. 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.”

21. 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.

22. The Exclusionary Rule
The Future of the Exclusionary Rule: It is Here to Stay