What Is The Exclusionary Rule

839 Words2 Pages
bulb-icon

Recommended: Proponents of the exclusionary rule

1. What is the exclusionary rule? Discuss its history through several landmark U.S. Supreme Court cases. The exclusionary rule is when police collect evidence that is related to a crime illegally, or against the defendant’s constitutional rights by unreasonable search and seizure. Such evidence is inadmissible in court. It is still inadmissible even if the seized evidence happens to be highly incriminating, such as a murder weapon (Dempsey, Forst, & Carter, 2016, p. 403). The history of the exclusionary rule starts in 1914 in the case of Weeks v. United States. Federal law enforcement officers had entered a man’s home without a warrant and seized evidence illegally. This evidence was used against him in court, and he was convicted. On appeal, the U.S. Supreme Court reversed the decision based on the unconstitutionally seized evidence and Established the …show more content…

Arizona, however the Supreme Court decided to focus on Miranda. Miranda signed a written confession, but there was no evidence that he was informed of his constitutional rights against self-incrimination. The other men also gave confessions after many interrogations, however, there is no evidence that they were informed of their rights either. However, the written confession was ultimately admitted into evidence at the trial despite the objection of the defense and the fact that the police officers admitted that they had not advised Miranda of his right to have an attorney present during the interrogation. They found Miranda guilty. At the appeal, the court held that Miranda’s constitutional rights were not violated because he did not specifically request counsel. After Miranda’s decision was overturned by the court, the state of Arizona retried him, and Miranda’s confession was not included with the evidence. Nonetheless, Miranda was still ultimately convicted and sentenced to 20-30 years at this trial as well (Casebriefs,

Show More
Related

  • Colorado Petitioneer V. Francis Barry Connelly Case Summary

    868 Words  | 2 Pages

    Arizona was not necessary to the decision. Justice Stevens both concurred and dissented in part of the judgments. Stevens claimed that recording the confession doesn’t mean it is involuntary or that it doesn’t follow the Due Process Clause. Stevens believed that Connelly’s incompetence to stand trial meant he could have been incompetent to waive his rights. Justices Brennan and Marshall dissented and also believed that Connelly’s mental state was a reasonable factor in determining the validity of his waiving of rights. They thought that a confession given by a defendant who is mentally ill is one not given under a clear state of mind and is not voluntary. Without his confession, officers would have never obtained valid evidence to convict him of murder. Due process requires independent collection of evidence that would contribute to a conviction. Since there was no police misconduct, the evidence gathered had to be because of Connelly’s free, voluntary, confession but he was not able to make an intellectual decision at that

    Read More

  • Reverse Discrimination: The Case of Allan Bakke

    1600 Words  | 4 Pages

    The name of this case and the specific facts, however, were unavailable at this time.9 Obviously affirmative action and reverse discrimination are still heavily debated issues. This is because they affect all people of all races and ethnicities. Conclusion Allan Bakke was denied his fourteenth amendment right to equal protection of the laws. In addition the University of California at Davis violated Title IV of the 1964 Civil Rights Act. By order of the Supreme Court Bakke was admitted and th e numerical quotas of the special admissions program were deemed unconstitutional. Justice was served to Bakke, but future generations who are not minorities may be plagued by the other half of the decision: That race may still be used as a "plus" on an application.

    Read More

  • Ernesto Miranda's Case Of Miranda Vs. Arizona

    813 Words  | 2 Pages

    After two hours of interrogation by the police, Miranda wrote a complete confession, admitting to the kidnapping and rape of an eighteen-year-old girl ten days earlier. Alvin Moore was assigned to represent Miranda at his trial which began June 20th, in front of Maricopa County Superior Court Judge Yale McFate. It was pointed out that Miranda had not been informed of his Fifth Amendment right to have an attorney present during police questioning. Despite that he had not been informed of his rights, Miranda was convicted, forcing him to appeal to the Arizona Supreme Court. The charges as well as the verdict remained the same. Miranda appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court in June of 1965. Criminal Defense Attorney John Flynn agreed to represent Miranda in Alvin Moore’s stead. The Supreme Court agreed that the written confession was not acceptable evidence because of Ernesto’s ignorance of his Fifth Amendment rights, and the police’s failure to inform him of them. Then state of Arizona re-tried him without the confession but with Twila Hoffman’s testimony. He was still found guilty and was sentenced to twenty to thirty years in prison, but this case set precedence for all other cases of this

    Read More

  • Compare And Contrast United States V. Leon

    716 Words  | 2 Pages

    The concurring opinion was given by Justice Blackmun. He agreed with the majority opinion that the exclusionary rule is valid as long as the officer and magistrate act in ?good faith?, but he wanted to stress that it is not a rule to take lightly, that it may change with how cases such as this are handled in the future. (United States v. Leon ,

    Read More

  • Dollree Mapp V. Ohio Case

    779 Words  | 2 Pages

    United States, the Court concluded that in order to protect the citizen’s Fourth Amendment right to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures, illegally seized evidence must be excluded in federal trials” (Gardner & Anderson, 2016, p. 215). The key phrase in this statement is “federal trials” because this indicates that the state courts did not have to adopt the exclusionary rule, and could still admit illegally seized evidence in their state-level court systems if they so pleased it. Unfortunately for Mapp’s, the state of Ohio did not adopt the exclusionary rule until later, which leads to me her arguments. Mapp’s argued that any evidence that is obtained illegally should be inadmissible in court. She further argued that the exclusionary rule or the Fourth Amendment rights should apply to all criminal prosecutions, including state

    Read More

  • Mapp v. Ohio and the Fourth Amendment

    762 Words  | 2 Pages

    This leads explanations leads to the conclusion that there are implications of being part of the criminal justice system. The exclusionary rule along with other justice terms such as the fruit of the poisoned tree force police and other law enforcement members to obtain evidence properly and in respect to the Due process. According to the textbook Criminal Justice in Action, any arrest or seizure is unreasonable unless is supported by probable cause (Gaines, 2011). More than probable cause, police officers should rely on facts and circumstances that will lead them to arrest the individual accordingly.

    Read More

  • False Confessions and the Norfolk Four Case

    2738 Words  | 6 Pages

    Elsen, Sheldon, and Arthur Rosett. “Protections for the Suspect under Miranda v. Arizona.” Columbia Law Review 67.4 (1967): 645-670. Web. 10 January 2014.

    Read More

  • Final Project for Criminal Evidence and Procedures

    2001 Words  | 5 Pages

    From a trial strategy point of view, you always start with the piece(s) of evidence you believe are most damaging to the client's case and work backwards looking for an exploitable flaw in the search and seizure procedure that would make that or those item(s) inadmissible. The further back in the series of events you can argue a fatal flaw, the more likely that the evidence and any additional materials which flowed from that particular item of evidence will be excluded. This is the practical analysis of all the times we see or hear of law enforcement arguing that there was some technical item which drew their attention and suspicion and justifies their hunch that criminal activity is afoot.

    Read More

  • Miranda vs. Arizona

    396 Words  | 1 Pages

    Miranda vs. Arizona Miranda vs. Arizona was a case that considered the rights of the defendants in criminal cases in regards to the power of the government. Individual rights did not change with the Miranda decision, however it created new constitutional guidelines for law enforcement, attorneys, and the courts. The guidelines ensure that the individual rights of the fifth, sixth and the fourteenth amendment are protected. This decision requires that unless a suspect in custody has been informed of his constitutional rights before questioning, anything he says may not be introduced in a court of law. The decision requires law enforcement officers to follow a code of conduct when arresting suspects.

    Read More

  • The Strange Career of Jim Crow

    1827 Words  | 4 Pages

    ... was a series of Supreme Court rulings which sanctioned separation. During 1898 in Pressy v. Ferguson ‘separate but equal’ rights were considered constitutional by the U.S. Supreme Court. These rights gave Southern states the leniency to physical separate different races in schools and public places(Woodward,71). Proscription, segregation, and disfranchisement were completed due to William v. Mississippi in 1898. This Mississippi plan approved by the U.S. Supreme Court deprived Negro’s of the franchise(Woodward,71).

    Read More

  • Racial Bias and Institutional Racism

    1767 Words  | 4 Pages

    As early as 1879, the United States Supreme Court, in Strauder v. West Virginia, loudly denounced the systematic exclusion of Black Americans from jury pools, finding that the practice violated the constitution, but state officials resisted its finding. The US Supreme Court has had to reapply the same basic principles to stop many state schemes designed to preclude Blacks from participating on grand juries, petit juries or both. In ...

    Read More

  • Supreme Court Cases: Brown V. Board Of Education

    495 Words  | 1 Pages

    The legal segregation in public facilities began with Plessy v. Ferguson court case. This case established “Separate but equal” doctrine. The supreme court stated that racial segregation did not conflict with 14th amendment. It was true that separation occurred in many public places, but the states did not give the equal facilities for

    Read More

  • Miranda Rights

    1348 Words  | 3 Pages

    Miranda v Arizona went all the way to the Supreme Court. There the Supreme Court ruled that the police do have a responsibility to inform a subject of an interrogation of their constitutional rights. The constitutional rights have to do with self-incrimination, and the right to counsel before, during and after questioning.

    Read More

  • Ernesto Miranda V. Arizona

    1501 Words  | 4 Pages

    Ernesto Miranda grew up not finishing high school. He didn’t finish the 9th grade, and he decided to drop out of school during that year. He also had a criminal record and had pronounced sexual fantasies after dropping out of high school. Ernesto Miranda was arrested in Phoenix in 1963. He had raped an 18 yr. girl who was mildly mentally handicapped in March of 1963. He was charged with rape, kidnapping, and robbery. When he was found and arrested, and he was not told of his rights before interrogation. After two hours of interrogation, the cops and detectives had a written confession from Miranda that he did do the crimes that he was acquitted for. Miranda also had a history mental instability, and had no counsel at the time of the trial. The prosecution at the trial mainly used his confession as evidence. Miranda was convicted of both counts of rape and kidnapping. He was sentenced to 20-30 years in prison. He tried to appeal to the Supreme Court in

    Read More

  • Gender Equality and the Law

    1057 Words  | 3 Pages

    The first case in which the Supreme Court invalidated a law which discriminated on the basis of sex became extremely important because it set the president to which many future opinions would refer. Reed v. Reed, 1971, Ginsburg argued that Sally Reed was denied equal protection which should have been protected by the Fourteenth Amendment, when her husband wa...

    Read More

More about What Is The Exclusionary Rule

Open Document