Pros And Cons Of Exclusionary Rule

966 Words4 Pages
The Exclusionary rule in the United States constitutional law simply states that any evidence taken from people with forced, shall not be allowed in court. Any evidence taken in an illegal search and seizure may not be used in court. The United State Supreme Court in conjunction with maintain the sole of the Constitution uses a combination of the fourth, fifth, sixth and even the fourteenth amendment to keep true the heart of “good faith" and the “fruit of the poisonous tree" or the exclusionary rule (Teacher, 2013). It will be prudent to understand these amendments, to how apply them. The Fourth Amendment main intentional creation to protect citizens from illegal searches and seizures. The Fifth Amendment is to protect from self-incrimination. The exclusionary rule applies to all who live within the United States of America. While the rule cover many areas it is not without its faults. Many people are not in favor of the exclusionary rule, perhaps because it often allows for the freedom of those criminal prosecuted. (INPUT BOOKS DEFEITION OF EXCUSIONARY RULE HERE).…show more content…
When the opposite occurs the burdens falls on the police department. For instances; in the case of Weeks v. United States in 1914, Chief Justice Edward D. held court in that the evidence illegally obtained by police in violation of the Fourth Amendment rights of Weeks. He ruled that it would not be admissible in federal courts eventually, in 1961, this rule was extended to state courts. The central drive for the exclusionary ruling is to discourage police misconduct then, now and for the future law enforcement. In another case, Rochin v. California (1952)—Exclusionary rule applied to all cases involving extreme police misconduct
The case ended in the Supreme Court with the case being reversed. The court’s concern was due process of the

More about Pros And Cons Of Exclusionary Rule

Open Document