Exclusionary Rule Essay

The fourth amendment is known for its ambiguity, however when taking a deeper look it is also where the exclusionary rule is derived from. The fourth amendment provides freedom from unreasonable search and seizure, meaning any evidence obtained violating the exclusionary rule is inadmissible in court. Unless, it is a good faith mistake. The evolution of the exclusionary rule is important and vital in providing protection to the people. Protection from the federal government and state officials will

warrant initial was for. For the next two and a half hours, the police laid siege to the house. Her lawyer appeared on the scene, and one of the policemen told him that they now had obtained a warrant to search the house, but refused to show it ("Exclusionary Rule"). The officers then forced their way into the house by knocking their doors down and she demanded to see the warrant. Flashing a piece of paper in the air, she snatched it from the police officer and and shoved it down her blouse in a defiant

However, the concurring opinion gave by Justice Hugo Black stated that the fourth amendment ban against unreasonable searches and seizures along with the fifth amendment’s ban against forced self-incrimination defends the exclusionary rule. Another concurring opinion was made by Justice William Douglas believed that the officers had violated Mapp’s “right to privacy”. Dissenting Opinion: Justice Harlan, Justices Frankfurter and Whittaker dissented. Justice Harlan wrote the dissenting

On May 23rd 1957, three police officers representing Cleveland Ohio came to the door of Miss Mapp’s residence with the suspicion of a bombing suspect hiding out in her home. Miss Mapp and her daughter lived in a two family two story home. Upon their arrival at the house the police knocked on the door and demanded entrance from Miss Mapp. However Miss Mapp didn’t open the door and instead asked them to provide a search warrant after she called her attorney. The officers advised their headquarters

This paper focuses on the Fourth Amendment and the Fifth Amendment cases of the Supreme court and the exclusionary rule. The first case was an issue with the Fourth Amendment, Whren v. United States. On June 10, 1993, several plainclothes police officers in unmarked cars were patrolling in a high drug area in Washington D.C.. for illegal drug activity (Hall, 1996). When observing a pathfinder at a stop sign with temporary tags remaining at the stop

Mapp v. Ohio (1961), was a milestone case in criminal procedure, in which the United States Supreme Court decided that evidence obtained in violation of the Fourth Amendment, which protects against "unreasonable searches and seizures,” which cannot be used in the law on the state level or in criminal prosecutions in state courts, and in addition, federal criminal law prosecutions in federal courts (MAPP v. OHIO. They Oyez Project at IIT Chicago-Kent College of Law.) The Supreme Court successfully

of the Founding Fathers’ affinity to defer to law enforcement authority when serving a warrant. On the contrary, evidence exists that the pervading legal philosophy of the time in which the Bill of Rights was drafted would have supported the exclusionary rule. Two high profile English court cases prior to the drafting of the Bill of Rights in 1791 demonstratively influenced the opinions of the writers of the Fourth Amendment on illegal search and seizure and the exclusion of evidence. The first case

justice system reveals one controversial statute facing our legal procedures and investigations: the exclusionary rule is an essential extension of the Fourth Amendment or the statue is an unnecessary law that is taken advantage of by criminals. The Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution protects Americans against unreasonable searches and seizures by law enforcement officials. The Exclusionary Rule, which mandates that evidence obtained in violation of the Fourth Amendment, is inadmissible in a

To the everyday US citizen the United States Supreme Court is a nonexistent entity that is not often heard from or seen unless it reaches a decision on a controversial case. Mapp v. Ohio was one of the controversial cases that the Supreme Court made a decision on in 1961. What were the facts of the case? What constitutional issues are in question? What did the court decide, and what were there reasoning of the justices? What is the significance of the case? The facts of the case was the police officers

Unit 3 Assignment: Pre-Trial Proceedings 1. Apply the Exclusionary rule to each of these three items of evidence and state whether or not the item should be excluded from evidence based on the Exclusionary Rule. If you selected any that WOULD be excluded, please explain why. I do not feel like any of the evidence that was recovered should be excluded based on the Exclusionary Rule. The cocaine was seen in plain view when the officer went into the home, who was given consent to come in by the wife