This is an extract of our Exclusionary Rule document, which we sell as part of our Criminal Procedure: Investigations Outlines collection written by the top tier of UC Berkeley School Of Law students.
The following is a more accessble plain text extract of the PDF sample above, taken from our Criminal Procedure: Investigations Outlines. Due to the challenges of extracting text from PDFs, it will have odd formatting:
Exclusionary rule: what happens when the 4th amen is violated?
I. Rule: Evidence obtained in violation of 4th amen cannot be used as evidence in a (federal) criminal prosecution a. Protection of the 4th amen is of no value unless we exclude evidence obtained in violation of the 4th amen i. Weeks: ran a lottery through the mail and found evidence in his house without a search warrant b. Applies to the states because it is a constitutional rule (Mapp v Ohio: lewd books and pics) i. Three justifications
1. Deterrence---lever to deter police misconduct because other remedies are illusory
2. Example---courts and judicial administration need to teach people importance of the law and respect of the law
3. Judicial integrity---something disreputable about the courts relying on unconstitutionally obtained evidence ii. Old rule (Wolf v Colorado) a. Exclusionary rule is a matter of judicial implication II. Scope of exclusionary rule a. Fruit of the poisonous tree is excluded; must be fruit of YOUR tree; bars physical material obtained during or as a direct result of unconstitutional invasion i. Wong Sun:
1. Toy made statement when he was arrested after police entered his home in violation of 4th amen, police then discovered heroine; both statement and heroine are fruit and excluded
2. Wong Sun's statement is admissible; he was arrested illegally but then he voluntarily came back; heroine can also be used against him there was no violation of his 4th amen rights in seizing the heroine (standing) b. EXCEPTIONS: exclusion is the last resort i. Attenuation
1. So attenuated as to dissipate the taint (Wong Sun)
2. If chain of consequences is too remote ii. Convictions finalized before Mapp iii. Impeachment of testifying D (Walder)
1. Exclusionary rule still applies if evidence is used to impeach witness other than D a. Don't like the idea of defendants being given a license to perjure themselves b. No additional deterrent necessary, evidence has already been excluded for other purposes iv. Independent source
Buy the full version of these notes or essay plans and more in our Criminal Procedure: Investigations Outlines.