Summary Of The Exclusionary Rule In The Justice System

A major case that helped further clarify the exclusionary rule in the justice system was the Davis v. The United States. The case regarded the admissibility of evidence obtained through unconstitutional searches and seizures derived from the fourth amendment. The implications for law enforcement and prosecution were also clarified by the exclusionary rule during the trial. Case Background Willie Davis was stopped by officers at a routine vehicle stop where he was asked for his name and decided to give a false name. Once the officers saw that Davis had given them a false name, he was arrested, and officers decided to search his vehicle. During the search officers found a revolver and, “Davis was then indicted on charges of being a felon in possession of a firearm” (Legal Information Institute, 2011). “The
Supreme Court & Exclusionary rule In the case of Davis v. The United States, the supreme court revisited the exclusionary rule to examine the law enforcement's method of obtaining evidence. The exclusionary rule also covers the Fifth Amendment, which protects against self-incrimination. As stated in lesson 4, “The purpose of the exclusionary rule is to prevent illegal police conduct and to penalize overzealous police officers for illegal searches and seizures” (Rio Salado College, n.d., Role of the Prosecutor and Alternatives to Prosecution). The rule protects individuals from unlawful government conduct and protects them from self-incrimination. The Supreme Court revisited the good faith exception where evidence obtained by law enforcement officers in reasonable reliance on a search warrant that is invalid could later be admissible in court. The Legal Information Institute (2011) states, “The argument that the availability of the exclusionary rule to enforce new Fourth Amendment precedent is a retroactivity issue, not a good-faith issue, is