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 78 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
Great answer, keep it coming :)


samiel-sayed

  • Member
  • Posts: 337
Reply 3 on: Yesterday
Excellent

 

Did you know?

The training of an anesthesiologist typically requires four years of college, 4 years of medical school, 1 year of internship, and 3 years of residency.

Did you know?

The heart is located in the center of the chest, with part of it tipped slightly so that it taps against the left side of the chest.

Did you know?

As many as 28% of hospitalized patients requiring mechanical ventilators to help them breathe (for more than 48 hours) will develop ventilator-associated pneumonia. Current therapy involves intravenous antibiotics, but new antibiotics that can be inhaled (and more directly treat the infection) are being developed.

Did you know?

Children of people with alcoholism are more inclined to drink alcohol or use hard drugs. In fact, they are 400 times more likely to use hard drugs than those who do not have a family history of alcohol addiction.

Did you know?

In the United States, there is a birth every 8 seconds, according to the U.S. Census Bureau's Population Clock.

For a complete list of videos, visit our video library