This topic contains a solution. Click here to go to the answer

Author Question: Detail five possible negative effects of the exclusionary rule. What will be an ideal ... (Read 38 times)

jasdeep_brar

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 569
Detail five possible negative effects of the exclusionary rule.
 
  What will be an ideal response?

Question 2

Explain five exceptions to the exclusionary rule.
 
  What will be an ideal response?



Related Topics

Need homework help now?

Ask unlimited questions for free

Ask a Question
Marked as best answer by a Subject Expert

yasmina

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 323
Answer to Question 1

Possible negative effects of the exclusionary rule include:
court delay
diversion of resources from trials to suppression hearings
weakening of the Fourth Amendment guarantees by judges reluctant to exclude
evidence
encouragement of plea bargaining
empowerment of corrupt police officers to immunize criminals by botching searches
imposition of extrajudicial punishment by officers who find themselves unable to
secure convictions lawfully
fostering false testimony by police officers

Answer to Question 2

There are five major exceptions to the exclusionary rule: collateral use, cross
examination, attenuation of taint, independent source and inevitable discovery, and
reasonable good faith exception.
The collateral use exception allows the use of illegally obtained evidence in nontrial
proceedings such as bail hearings, preliminary hearings, grand jury proceedings and
habeas corpus proceedings. The cross examination exception means that while the
government cannot use illegally obtained evidence in the case in chief, it can be used to
impeach the credibility of a defendant's testimony.
The attenuation exception says that illegally obtained evidence can still be admitted if
the poisonous connection between illegal police actions and the evidence obtained
through these actions are weak enough. The Supreme Court has not established a
bright-line rule for when this is so; each case must be considered in its own
circumstances.
Under the independent source exception, if police officers violate the Constitution
looking for evidence and then in a totally separate matter lawfully get the same
evidence it can still be admitted. As for the inevitable discovery exception, if police get
the evidence through illegal activity but would have eventually found it through nonillegal activity, then the exclusionary rule does not apply.
Finally, under the good faith exception, if police officers act honestly and reasonably on
the belief that they have a lawfully-issued warrant or some other means of searching
or arresting a suspect, then even if the warrant or other means later on turns out to be
defective, the exclusionary rule will not apply to exclude the evidence.




jasdeep_brar

  • Member
  • Posts: 569
Reply 2 on: Aug 16, 2018
:D TYSM


mcabuhat

  • Member
  • Posts: 344
Reply 3 on: Yesterday
Excellent

 

Did you know?

If you use artificial sweeteners, such as cyclamates, your eyes may be more sensitive to light. Other factors that will make your eyes more sensitive to light include use of antibiotics, oral contraceptives, hypertension medications, diuretics, and antidiabetic medications.

Did you know?

Cocaine was isolated in 1860 and first used as a local anesthetic in 1884. Its first clinical use was by Sigmund Freud to wean a patient from morphine addiction. The fictional character Sherlock Holmes was supposed to be addicted to cocaine by injection.

Did you know?

Dogs have been used in studies to detect various cancers in human subjects. They have been trained to sniff breath samples from humans that were collected by having them breathe into special tubes. These people included 55 lung cancer patients, 31 breast cancer patients, and 83 cancer-free patients. The dogs detected 54 of the 55 lung cancer patients as having cancer, detected 28 of the 31 breast cancer patients, and gave only three false-positive results (detecting cancer in people who didn't have it).

Did you know?

Most childhood vaccines are 90–99% effective in preventing disease. Side effects are rarely serious.

Did you know?

As of mid-2016, 18.2 million people were receiving advanced retroviral therapy (ART) worldwide. This represents between 43–50% of the 34–39.8 million people living with HIV.

For a complete list of videos, visit our video library