The Exclusionary Rule is important to both police and the public because it lays out a clear guideline for action during a police action. Having this rule in place limits the responsibilities that are applied to the officer by stating what they are responsible to gather or not gather during their investigation of a scene. For the public the officer is prevented from illegally conducting search and seizure of a property.
Exclusionary rule causes disregard to all evidence that was not obtained through legal methods (like a lot of the evidence on TV crime shows). By not allowing illegally obtained evidence, due process (the government's respect for the rights of citizens) is achieved as cops will respect the rights of citizens if they know that, if they do not, they won't be able to put a criminal behind bars.
Basically, it's a legal method that guarantees due process is followed by forcing policemen, etc. to obey the law.
Supreme Court cases diminished the scope of the exclusionary rule?
Exclusionary Rule
Supreme Court cases diminished the scope of the exclusionary rule?
to protect citizens' rights.
The Exclusionary Rule.
Yes, the Exculsionary Rule should be abandoned.
Some potential consequences of the exclusionary law is that it could keep evidence that is pertinent to a case out of the courtroom. If it is the only evidence that could keep be used to convict a guilty person it is problematic.
The Supreme Court created an exception to the exclusionary rule for searches conducted by school administrators.
Fourth Amendment
Probable cause and the exclusionary rule
That was not used in this case.
grand juries are not held to the same standard in regards to the exclusionary rule as police are... the exclusionary rule deters unlawful police conduct allowing the exclusionary rule for grand juries "unduly" interferes with the duties of the grand jury that are in merits supposed to be quick and effective Holding: The Court holds that the exclusionary rule in search and seizure cases does not apply to grand jury proceedings because the principal objective of the rule is "to deter future unlawful police conduct," and "it is unrealistic to assume that application of the rule to grand jury proceedings would significantly further that goal." Dissent: exclusionary rule protects against "all potential victims of unlawful government conduct"