Help
Options
Didn't know it?
click below
click below
Knew it?
click below
click below
Don't Know
Remaining cards (0)
Know
retry
shuffle
restart
0:00
Embed Code - If you would like this activity on your web page, copy the script below and paste it into your web page.
Normal Size Small Size show me how
Normal Size Small Size show me how
Exclusionary Rule
Chapter 4
| Question | Answer |
|---|---|
| Any evidence that is obtained by the government in violation of the fourth amendment guarantee against unreasonable searches and seizures is what? | Not admissible in a criminal prosecution to prove guilt |
| When the exclusionary rule came out who was it applicable to? | Federal Law enforcement only |
| Exclusionary rule was created by who? | Supreme Court |
| Does a whole case have to be dismissed from inadmissible evidence? | Not unless the whole case revolves around that specific evidence |
| The Supreme Court stated what about the exclusionary rule? | That only evidence obtained in violation of the 4th amendment guarantee will be suppressed |
| What is the exclusionary rule according to (U.S. v. Leon)? | "Judicially created remedy designed to safeguard fourth amendment rights" |
| What's the purpose of the exclusionary rule? | To deter police misconduct |
| The exclusionary rule is what? | Judge Made but its underlying factor is the 4th amendment |
| Exclusionary rule is essential to what? | The 4th and 14th amendment (Mapp v. Ohio) |
| What does (Arizona v. Evans) say about the exclusionary rule? | It operates as a judicially created remedy to safeguard against future violations of the 4th amendment |
| What is Historical origin? | Didn't exist in English common law in 1914 evidence that was illegally obtained by federal officers was excluded in all federal criminal prosecutions (Weeks v. U.S.) |
| 1). instance regarding exclusionary rule? | 1914 Weeks vs. U.S.- declaration of exclusionary rule |
| In 1949 the U.S. supreme court decided what? | Held that states courts were not constitutionally required to exclude illegally obtained evidence, so the exclusionary rule did not apply to state prosecution |
| 2). instance regarding exclusionary rule? | Wolf vs. Colorado- No state prosecutions for the exclusionary rule |
| In 1952 the U.S. supreme court decided what? | To modify their ruling that although the exclusionary rule did not apply to states, some searches were so "shocking" as to require exclusion of evidence seized under due process clause in the case of Rochin Vs. California |
| What is the silver platter doctrine? | Federal courts permitted evidence illegally obtained by the state officers |
| 3). instance regarding the exclusionary rule? | 1952 Rochin vs. California- Only "shocking"- brutal and violent |
| How did the silver platter doctrine work? | State officers would illegally obtain evidence and give it to the Feds |
| In 1960 the U.S. supreme court ruled what? | They ruled that the 4th amendment prohibits the use of illegally obtained evidence in federal prosecutions obtained by fed or state officers ending the silver platter doctrine (Elkins vs. U.S.) |
| 4). instance regarding the exclusionary rule? | 1960 Elkins vs. U.S.- ending the silver platter |
| In 1961 the U.S. supreme court ruled what? | Overturned the Wolf decision and required state courts to exclude evidence obtained by unlawful searches and seizures (Mapp vs. Ohio) |
| 5). instance regarding the exclusionary rule? | 1961 Mapp vs. Ohio- overturned Wolf and state actions were also added to the exclusionary rule |
| The exclusionary Rule can be evoked when? | At any stage in CJ process including by Habius Corpus |
| Who can use the exclusionary rule? | Both sides can use it to appeal (Appeal vs. Interlocutory appeal |
| If evidence gets excluded from a trial what can be done? | Prosecution can file an immediate interlocutory appeal which sends evidence to a higher judge for review. Used when prosecution's whole argument falls on the evidence that got excluded |
| What happens if defense files motion to exclude evidence in a timely manner and the trial court denies the motion? | An appeal will automatically reverse the conviction, unless it's harmless error |
| Harmless error must show what? | There is no reasonable possibility a diff verdict would have been reached (Chapman v. California) |
| Habeas Corpus is what? | If the defendant is found guilty and the appeal court upholds the conviction, the defendant may invoke E/R later through a habeas corpus proceeding |
| Standing is what? | Only defendants with standing can claim the benefits of the exclusionary rule |
| What was (Minnesota v. Carter)? | USSC held that defendants who were on a short-term visit and who together with the lessee, used an apartment to package drugs rather than as a resident, had no legal expectations of privacy in apartment. (Had no standing) |
| What is fruit of the poisonous tree? | (Secondary Evidence) Once the primary evidence is shown to have been unlawfully obtained, any secondary evidence that derived from it is also inadmissible. |
| Case involving Fruit of Poisonous Tree? | Silverhorne Lumber Co. v. United States |
| What is (Primary v. Secondary Evidence)? | It is distinction without a difference |
| Primarily illegal searches do what to any other searches? | Taints it |
| Are there exceptions to the Exclusionary rule? | Yes, the court has ID a number of exceptions |
| Category 1 Good Faith exception is what? | Evidence is admissible even if there was an error as long as the error wasn't committed by police. It was honest and reasonable |
| Good Faith exception A is? | When the error was committed by the judge |
| Massachusetts v. Shappard was what? | Wrong form was filled out and judge signed off, but judge forgot to correct the form, since it was in good faith the conviction still stands because it was a judge error not a police error |
| Evidence obtained by good faith through an invalid warrant is? | Admissible at trial |
| Suppression of evidence wouldn't work in the Sheppard case, why? | It would not serve the deterrent function of the exclusionary rule as there was no police misconduct |
| Good Faith exception B is? | When the error was committed by a court employee (Arizona v. Evans) |
| Good Faith exception C is? | When the police erred accidentally (Maryland v. Garrison) |
| What happened in Maryland v. Garrison? | In the case the court added law enforcement can't search an unreasonable place and claim good faith |
| Good Faith exception D is ? | Apparent authority when the police reasonably believed that authority to enter was valid (Illinois v. Rodriguez) |
| Good Faith exception E is? | When police action was based on law that was later declared unconstitutional (Illinois v. Krull) |
| Suppression was inappropriate in Krull case because? | The fault lies not with the Police but with Legislature |
| What happened in Illinois v. Krull? | State allowed search without a warrant, search was conducted, and next day federal court held the state rule unconstitutional |
| Good Faith exception F is? | When police obtain evidence based on the mistakes of other police officers (Herring v. U.S.) |
| What did court rule on Herring v. U.S.? | Court said that mere isolated negligence and non-systemic errors by the police are in a category of good faith and not lead to the exclusion of evidence |
| Category 2 of exceptions to Exclusionary rule are what? | inevitable discovery |
| Evidence is admissible if what? | If the police can prove that they would have inevitably discovered it anyway by lawful means, regardless of their illegal action |
| What Case involves category 2 inevitable discovery? | Nix v. Williams |
| What happened in Mapp v. Ohio? | |
| Category 3 of exception to the exclusionary rule are what? | The purged taint exception |
| The purged taint exception is what? | A defendant intervening act of free will is sufficient to break the casual chain between the tainted evidence and the illegal police conduct, so evidence becomes admissible (Wong Sun v. United States |
| What is Wong Sun v. United States? | Police conducted illegal search of home; police wanted him to confess but he refused. Wong then waited a few days then came to the station and confessed. If he signed confession originally it would've been inadmissible but since he waited its admissible |
| What was the subsequent case to Wong? | This was Brown v. Illinois |
| Category 4 of the exception to the exclusionary rule are what? | Independent source exception |
| Independent source exception is what? | Evidence is admissible if the police can prove that evidence was obtained through an independent source not connected with the illegal search or seizure (State v. O'bremski) |
| In how many instances does the exclusionary rule not apply? | There are 6 instances |
| What is the first instance of an Exclusionary rule exception? | Violation of knock and announce |
| What is knock and announce? | Any time a search warrant is issued law enforcement before entering must knock and announce before entering |
| What is the second instance of an Exclusionary rule exception? | Search by private persons |
| What is a search by private persons? | The E/R only applies to people who have law enforcement powers |
| What is the third instance of an Exclusionary rule exception? | Grand Jury |
| What is the Grand Jury? | There are no rules of evidence, the grand jury is permitted to use illegally obtained evidence to gain an indictment |
| What's the purpose of the Grand Jury? | The purpose of the grand jury is to determine probable cause |
| Who runs the Grand Jury? | The Prosecutor |
| What is the fourth instance of an Exclusionary rule exception? | During Sentencing |
| What is During Sentencing? | Evidence must be reliable but can be illegal |
| What is the fifth instance of an Exclusionary rule exception? | Non-Criminal actions |
| What are non-Criminal actions? | Administrative hearings and civil court |
| What is the sixth instance of an Exclusionary rule exception? | Parole Revocations |
| What are parole revocations? | Any type of evidence is allowed there is no exclusionary rule |
| Does a cop need probable cause to search someone they know is on parole? | No |
| How long must police wait after knocking and announcing their presence? | The wait time is vague. It's not necessarily how long to reach the door, it's how long it would take to dispose of the evidence |
| What is suppression of evidence? | This is a last resort not "first impulse" of the court |
| Is the court cautious about expanding the exclusionary rule? | yes |
| What's the first reasoning for knock and announce? | May provoke violence in supposed self-defense by surprised resident due to unannounced entrance |
| What's the second reasoning for knock and announce? | It also protects those elements of privacy and dignity that can be destroyed by sudden entrance |
| Why is E/R inapplicable to knock and announce? | This is because it violates that knock and announce has nothing to do with seizure of evidence |
| The knock and announce rule have never what? | Protected one's interest in preventing the gov from seeing and taking evidence described in a warrant. |
| The requires that police have what? | Reasonable suspicion under the particular circumstances that one of these grounds exists |
Created by:
Matt58