FACTOID # 29: 73.3% of America's gross operating surplus in motion picture and sound recording industries comes from California.
 
 Home   Encyclopedia   Statistics   States A-Z   Flags   Maps   FAQ   About 
   
 
WHAT'S NEW
 

SEARCH ALL

FACTS & STATISTICS    Advanced view

Search encyclopedia, statistics and forums:

 

 

(* = Graphable)

 

 


Encyclopedia > Exclusionary rule
Criminal procedure
Criminal trials and convictions
Rights of the accused
Right to a fair trial  · Speedy trial
Jury trial  · Presumption of innocence
Exclusionary rule (U.S.)
Self-incrimination  · Double jeopardy
Verdict
Acquittal  · Conviction
Not proven (Scot.)  · Directed verdict
Sentencing
Mandatory  · Suspended  · Custodial
Dangerous offender (Can.)
Capital punishment  · Execution warrant
Cruel and unusual punishment
Post-conviction events
Parole  · Probation
Tariff (UK)  · Life licence (UK)
Miscarriage of justice
Exoneration  · Pardon
Related areas of law
Criminal defenses
Criminal law  · Evidence
Civil procedure
Portals: Law  · Criminal justice

In United States constitutional law, the exclusionary rule is a legal principle holding that evidence collected or analyzed in violation of the U.S. Constitution is inadmissible for a criminal prosecution in a court of law (that is, it cannot be used in a criminal trial). Image File history File links Scale_of_justice. ... Criminal procedure refers to the legal process for adjudicating claims that someone has violated the criminal law. ... Headline text The rights of the accused is a class of rights in that apply to a person in the time period between when they are formally accused of a crime and when they are either convicted or acquitted. ... The Right to a fair trial is an essential right in all countries respecting the rule of law. ... This article or section does not cite its references or sources. ... A jury trial is a trial in which the judge of the facts, as opposed to the judge of the law, is a jury, made up of citizens who are usually randomly selected and are generally not legal professionals. ... Presumption of innocence is a legal right that the accused enjoys in criminal trials in many modern nations. ... Self-incrimination is the act of accusing oneself of a crime for which a person can then be prosecuted. ... Double jeopardy (also called autrefois acquit meaning already acquitted) is a procedural defense (and, in many countries such as the United States, Canada and India, a constitutional right) that forbids a defendant from being tried a second time for a crime, after having already been tried for the same crime. ... In law, a verdict indicates the judgment of a case before a court of law. ... In criminal law, an acquittal is the legal result of a verdict of not guilty, or some similar end of the proceeding that terminates it with prejudice without a verdict of guilty being entered against the accused. ... Not proven is a verdict available to a court in Scotland. ... In U.S. law, a directed verdict is an order from the judge presiding over a jury trial that one side or the other wins. ... In law, a sentence forms the final act of a judge-ruled process, and also the symbolic principal act connected to his function. ... A mandatory sentence is a judicial decision setting the punishment to be inflicted on a person convicted of a crime where judicial discretion is limited by law. ... A suspended sentence is a legal construct. ... A custodial sentence is a judicial sentence, imposing a punishment (and hence the resulting punishment itself) consisting of mandatory custody of the convict, either in prison (incarceration) or in some other closed therapeutic and/or (re)educational institution, such as a reformatory, (maximum security) psychiatry or drug detoxication (especially cold... In the Canadian legal system, the dangerous offender designation allows the courts to impose an indefinite sentence on a convicted person, regardless of whether the crime carries a life sentence or not. ... Capital punishment, or the death penalty, is the execution of a convicted criminal by the State as punishment for crimes known as capital crimes or capital offenses. ... An execution warrant is a warrant which authorizes the execution or capital punishment of an individual. ... The statement that the government shall not inflict cruel and unusual punishment for crimes is found in the English Bill of Rights signed in 1689 by William of Orange and Queen Mary II who were then the joint rulers of England following the Glorious Revolution of 1688. ... Parole can have different meanings depending on the context. ... Probation is the suspension of a prison or jail sentence - the criminal who is on probation has been convicted of a crime, but instead of serving prison time, has been found by the Court to be amenable to probation and will be returned to the community for a period in... Under British criminal law, a tariff is the minimum period that a person serving an indefinite prison sentence must serve before that person becomes eligible for parole. ... Life licence is a term used in the British criminal justice system for the conditions under which a prisoner sentenced to life in jail may be released. ... A miscarriage of justice is primarily the conviction and punishment of a person for a crime that they did not commit. ... Exoneration occurs when a person who has been convicted of a crime is later proved to have been innocent of that crime. ... A pardon is the forgiveness of a crime and the penalty associated with it. ... Criminal law (also known as penal law) is the body of statutory and common law that deals with crime and the legal punishment of criminal offenses. ... The law of evidence governs the use of testimony (e. ... Civil procedure is the body of law that sets out the process that courts will follow when hearing cases of a civil nature (a civil action). These rules govern how a lawsuit or case may be commenced, what kind of service of process is required, the types of pleadings or... In the United States, constitutional law generally refers to the provisions of the United States Constitution, as interpreted by the United States Supreme Court. ... The law of evidence governs the use of testimony (e. ... The United States Constitution is the supreme law of the United States of America. ... A court is an official, public forum which a sovereign establishes by lawful authority to adjudicate disputes, and to dispense civil, labour, administrative and criminal justice under the law. ... Criminal procedure refers to the legal process for adjudicating claims that someone has violated the criminal law. ...


The Exclusionary Rule is designed to provide a remedy and disincentive, short of criminal prosecution, for prosecutors and police who illegally gather evidence in violation of the Fourth and Fifth Amendments in the Bill of Rights, which provide for protection from unreasonable searches and seizure and compelled self-incrimination. Criminal law (also known as penal law) is the body of law that regulates governmental sanctions (such as imprisonment and/or fines) as retaliation for crimes against the social order. ... Amendment IV (the Fourth Amendment) of the United States Constitution, which is part of the Bill of Rights, guards against unreasonable searches and seizures. ... Amendment V (the Fifth Amendment) of the United States Constitution, which is part of the Bill of Rights, is related to legal procedure. ... A bill of rights is a statement of certain rights which, under a societys laws, citizens and/or residents either have, want to have, or ought to have. ... Amendment IV (the Fourth Amendment) of the United States Constitution, which is part of the Bill of Rights, guards against unreasonable searches and seizures. ... Self-incrimination is the act of accusing oneself of a crime for which a person can then be prosecuted. ...


The Exclusionary Rule applies to all citizens or aliens (illegal or documented) that reside within the United States. Citizenship is membership in a political community (originally a city but now usually a state) and carries with it rights to political participation; a person having such membership is a citizen. ... In law, an alien is a person who is not a citizen of the land where he or she is found. ...

Contents


History of the Rule

The exclusionary rule was created in 1914 in the case of Weeks v. United States. This decision, however, created the rule only on the federal level. It was not until Mapp v. Ohio, 367 U.S. 643 (1961) that the exclusionary rule was also held to be binding on the states through the Fourteenth Amendment, which guarantees due process. This landmark decision was considered by former Justice Potter Stewart as "the most important search and seizure decision in [American] history." Holding The warrantless seizure of documents from a private home violated the Fourth Amendment prohibition against unreasonable searches and seizures, and evidence obtained in this manner is excluded from use in federal criminal prosecutions. ... Holding The Fourth Amendment prohibition against unreasonable searches and seizures, as applied to the states through the Fourteenth, excludes unconstitutionally obtained evidence from use in criminal prosecutions. ... // Case citation is the system used in common law countries such as the United States, England and Wales, Canada, New Zealand, Australia and India to uniquely identify the location of past court cases in special series of books called reporters or law reports. ... 1961 (MCMLXI) was a common year starting on Sunday (the link is to a full 1961 calendar). ... A state of the United States (a U.S. state) is any one of the fifty states (four of which officially favor the term commonwealth) which, along with the District of Columbia, form the United States of America. ... The Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution is one of the post-Civil War amendments and includes the Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses. ... To meet Wikipedias quality standards, this article or section may require cleanup. ... Justice Potter Stewart Potter Stewart (January 23, 1915 – December 7, 1985) was an Associate Justice of the United States Supreme Court. ...


Limitations of the Rule

The exclusionary rule does not apply in a civil case, in a grand jury proceeding, or in a parole revocation hearing. In the common law, civil law refers to the area of law governing relations between private individuals. ... A grand jury is a type of common law jury responsible for investigating alleged crimes, examining evidence, and issuing indictments if they believe that there is enough evidence for a trial to proceed. ... Parole can have different meanings depending on the context. ...


Even in a standard criminal case, the Exclusionary Rule does not simply bar the introduction of all evidence obtained from all violations of the Fourth, Fifth, or Sixth Amendments. In Hudson v. Michigan, 547 U.S. ___, No. 04-1360 (June 15, 2006), the U.S. Supreme Court wrote

Suppression of evidence, however, has always been our last resort, not our first impulse. The exclusionary rule generates "substantial social costs," United States v. Leon, 468 U.S. 897, 907 (1984), which sometimes include setting the guilty free and the dangerous at large. We have therefore been "cautious against expanding" it, Colorado v. Connelly, 479 U.S. 157, 166 (1986), and "have repeatedly emphasized that the rule's 'costly toll' upon truth-seeking and law enforcement objectives presents a high obstacle for those urging [its] application," Pennsylvania Bd. of Probation and Parole v. Scott, 524 U.S. 357, 364-365 (1998) (citation omitted). We have rejected "indiscriminate application" of the rule, Leon, supra, at 908, and have held it to be applicable only "where its remedial objectives are thought most efficaciously served," United States v. Calandra, 414 U.S. 338, 348 (1974) -- that is, "where its deterrence benefits outweigh its 'substantial social costs,'" Scott, supra, at 363, (quoting Leon, supra, at 907).

  • * *
Whether the exclusionary sanction is appropriately imposed in a particular case is an issue separate from the question whether the Fourth Amendment rights of the party seeking to invoke the rule were violated by police conduct.

The Court in Hudson found that the costs of applying the exclusionary rule to the necessarily gray area of the "knock and announce" requirement were outweighed by the deterrence benefit. Over vigorous dissent the Court wrote, "But ignoring knock-and-announce can realistically be expected to achieve absolutely nothing except the prevention of destruction of evidence and the avoidance of life-threatening resistance by occupants of the premises -- dangers which, if there is even "reasonable suspicion" of their existence, suspend the knock-and-announce requirement anyway. Massive deterrence is hardly required."


The Court in Hudson further held that a search whose only illegality is the failure to announce cannot uncover any evidence that would not have been uncovered if the announcement had been properly made, and therefore the suppression of evidence is not an appropriate remedy.


The Exclusionary Rule is not applicable to aliens residing outside of U.S. borders. In United States v. Alvarez the U.S. Supreme Court decided that property owned by aliens in a foreign country is admissible in court. Certain persons in the U.S. receive limited protections, such as prisoners, probationers, parolees, and persons crossing U.S. borders. Corporations, by virtue of being, also have limited rights under the Fourth Amendment (see corporate personhood). Corporate personhood is a term used to describe the legal fiction used within United States law that a corporation has a limited number or subset of the same constitutional rights as a human being. ...


Exceptions to the Rule

Even when the Exclusionary Rule does apply, the rule excludes the illegally obtained evidence only on the issue of the defendant's guilt for the particular crime charged. The evidence can still be admitted to impeach the credibility of the defendant's trial testimony; however, this exception applies only if the defendant testifies, and the evidence is relevant to call into question the truthfulness of the defendant's testimony. Witness impeachment, in the law of evidence, is the process of calling into question the credibility of an individual who is testifying in a trial. ... In law and in religion, testimony is a solemn attestation as to the truth of a matter. ...


The inevitable discovery doctrine is a direct exception to the exclusionary rule, in that it allows the admission of evidence on the issue of the defendant's guilt where the evidence would otherwise have been excluded. This doctrine was adopted first by the United States Supreme Court in Nix v Williams in 1984. It holds that evidence obtained through an unlawful search or seizure is admissible in court if it can be established, to a very high degree of probability, that normal police investigation would have inevitably led to the discovery of the evidence. This decision was upheld because given the fact that the exclusionary rule was created specifically to deter police and state misconduct, excluding evidence that would inevitably (hypothetically) have been discovered otherwise would not serve to deter police misconduct. In People v. Stith, the Court stated that this doctrine may not be used to admit primary evidence but only secondary evidence, i.e. evidence found as a result of the primary evidence.


The attenuation exception to the exclusionary rule is that evidence may be suppressed only if there is a clear causal connection between the illegal police action and the evidence. The evidence must result from the unlawful conduct. A three-pronged test was created in People v. Martinez to determine whether there was sufficient attenuation of this connection (i.e. the lack of connection between the disputed evidence and the unlawful conduct): (1) the time period between the illegal arrest and the ensuing confession or consensual search; (2) the presence of intervening factors or event; and (3) the purpose and flagrancy of the official misconduct. Reduction of signal strength during transmission. ...


The independent source exception allows evidence to be admitted in court if knowledge of the evidence is gained from a separate, or independent, source that is completely unrelated to the illegality at hand. This rule was formally accepted in People v. Arnau.


The good-faith exception may allow some evidence gathered in violation of the Constitution if the violation results in only a minor or technical error. If a magistrate is erroneous in granting a police officer a warrant, and the officer acts on the warrant in good faith, then the evidence resulting in the execution of the warrant is not suppressible. However, there are a number of situations in which the good faith exception will not apply: In United States constitutional law, the good-faith exception (also good-faith exemption) is a legal doctrine providing an exemption to the exclusionary rule. ... In law, a warrant can mean any authorization. ...

  1. No reasonable officer would have relied on the affidavit underlying the warrant.
  2. The warrant is defective on its face for failing to state the place to be searched or things to be seized.
  3. The warrant was obtained by fraud on the part of a government official.
  4. The magistrate has "wholly abandoned his judicial role."

An affidavit is a formal sworn statement of fact, written down, signed, and witnessed (as to the veracity of the signature) by a taker of oaths, such as a notary public. ...

Non-US Use

For the most part, non-US courts have rejected the concept of the exculsionary rule.[1]


  Results from FactBites:
 
Exclusionary rule - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (1176 words)
In United States constitutional law, the exclusionary rule is a legal principle holding that evidence collected or analyzed in violation of the U.S. Constitution is inadmissible for a criminal prosecution in a court of law (that is, it cannot be used in a criminal trial).
The Exclusionary Rule is designed to provide a remedy and disincentive, short of criminal prosecution, for prosecutors and police who illegally gather evidence in violation of the Fourth and Fifth Amendments in the Bill of Rights, which provide for protection from unreasonable searches and seizure and compelled self-incrimination.
The exclusionary rule does not apply in a civil case, in a grand jury proceeding, or in a parole revocation hearing.
Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (1998 words)
United States, 389 U.S., the Supreme Court ruled that there is no search unless an individual has an "expectation of privacy" and the expectation is "reasonable"—that is, it is one that society is prepared to recognize.
The rule was made applicable to the states in Mapp v.
Closely related to the exclusionary rule is the "fruit of the poisonous tree" doctrine, under which the government is prohibited from introducing any evidence that was obtained subsequent to and as a result of the illegal search.
  More results at FactBites »

 
 

COMMENTARY     


Share your thoughts, questions and commentary here
Your name
Your comments

Want to know more?
Search encyclopedia, statistics and forums:

 


Press Releases |  Feeds | Contact
The Wikipedia article included on this page is licensed under the GFDL.
Images may be subject to relevant owners' copyright.
All other elements are (c) copyright NationMaster.com 2003-5. All Rights Reserved.
Usage implies agreement with terms, 1022, m