Preview

The Exclusionary Rule Of Weeks V. United States

Good Essays
Open Document
Open Document
815 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
The Exclusionary Rule Of Weeks V. United States
Basically the Exclusionary rule as set forth by the US Supreme Court states that any evidence obtained by police through search and seizure, arrest, interrogations and stop and frisk situations or any other evidence despite its relevance can be excluded as evidence. The Weeks v. United States was basically the origin of the Exclusionary Rule in 1914. In Weeks v United States Mrs, Weeks was arrested for shoplifting and attempted to get a note to her husband about this. Law enforcement went to the residence and without a warrant searched the home and found illegal lottery tickets and removed everything in relation to the tickets charging him with a federal crime because there was evidence showing these were handled through the mail. Mr. Weeks attorney filed with the courts this was illegally obtained evidence and should be excluded. The judge agreed that items taken not incriminating should be released and excluded and Mr. Weeks was later found guilty and the Supreme Court ruled all illegally obtained evidence was inadmissible overturning the conviction. This ruling was aimed at federal law enforcement and not the state government agencies (Dempsey & Forst, n.d.). It was not until 1961 via Mapp v …show more content…
In Mapp, the Court held that the exclusionary rule was an “essential part” of the Fourth Amendment, and that the Fourteenth Amendment’s Due Process Clause, which says that “No state shall…deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law,” meant that the federal exclusionary rule now applied to the states. “Since the Fourth Amendment’s right of privacy has been declared enforceable against the States through the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth, it is enforceable against them by the same sanction of exclusion as is used against the Federal Government.” ( http://billofrightsinstitute.org/resources/educator-resources/lessons-plans/landmark-cases-and-the-constitution/mapp-v-ohio-1961/

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Good Essays

    Evans (1995), the respondent was stopped because of a routine traffic stop. The officer’s computer indicated that there was a misdemeanor warrant out for the respondent’s arrest. The officer search his car and found marijuana in it, so the officer charged him with possession. The respondent tried to have the marijuana suppressed as evidence since his warrant had been squashed since before the arrest. This was denied because the purpose of the exclusionary rule wouldn't be served if they dismissed evidence that was obtained by error of employees. These employees were not directly associated with the arresting officer. So the arresting officer had no way of knowing that the misdemeanor warrant wasn't valid. Since the error was a clerical error exclusionary rule was not applied to suppress the…

    • 1275 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Essay Arizona vs. Grant

    • 356 Words
    • 2 Pages

    The case Arizona vs. Grant occured because an event that happened on August 25, 1999 involving two police officers, and a suspect who was believed to be involved in narcotics activity. The officers first visit to the house where the suspect lived was followed by a second visit later that night because he wasnt there at the initial visit. After their first visit they ran a background check and found causes for the arrest of the subject, Rodney Grant. Upon the second return the subject Rodney Grant was apprehended after pulling into his driveway and walking about ten feet towards the officers. After they placed him in the police vehicle, they searched the suspects car, which was the cause of the Arizona vs Grant case, because of a debate on evidence pulled from the car without reasonable reasons to search it. Although there was cocaine and a weapons in the car, the officers didnt have reasons to prove why the searched it after the suspect had already been apprehended and put into the police vehicle. It is because of this that led to questioning of why the car was searched because Grant was not in the nearby vicinity of the vehicle and therefore no harm to the officers unless he had a weapons in his immediate possession.…

    • 356 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    Dollree Mapp Case Study

    • 452 Words
    • 2 Pages

    Mapp argued that the police had no warrant to be able to access and search her property and she believed that all evidence found should be discarded since it violated the 4th amendment, which states that “The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated.”…

    • 452 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Chapter Four – The Exclusionary Rule Vicente Farias Jose Martinez The Exclusionary Rule  The Exclusionary Rule – Evidence obtained in violation of Fourth Amendment cannot be used at trial – The primary purpose of the exclusionary rule is to deter police misconduct – What other purpose does the exclusionary rule have? The Exclusionary Rule …

    • 280 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    Dollree Mapp Case Study

    • 346 Words
    • 2 Pages

    The court stated that the exclusionary rule also applies to states, meaning that states cannot use evidence gained by illegal means to convict someone. Clark argued that the Fourth Amendment strictly implies that the use of evidence obtained in violation of the amendment is unconstitutional. Furthermore this overturned the Wolf ruling, the Supreme Court had found that the Fourth Amendment’s protection against “police incursion into privacy” is incorporate if the right to privacy is incorporated. He also went on explaining the courts rationale based on the connection between the Fourth and the Fourteenth amendment when saying that since the Fourth amendment is a right of privacy and has been declared enforceable through the Fourteenth then it is enforceable against them by the same sanction of exclusion. The court believed that if the right to privacy stated in the Fourth amendment is valid with regard to action by the states they so should be exclusionary…

    • 346 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Mapp V. Ohio Case Study

    • 1111 Words
    • 5 Pages

    Justice Black also believes the command that no unreasonable searches or seizures be allowed is too little to infer such a large decision. With these differences aside Justice Black feels that along with previous court decisions that the "Fourth Amendment's ban against unreasonable searches and seizures is considered together with the Fifth Amendment's ban against compelled self-incrimination, a constitutional basis emerges which not only justifies, but actually requires the exclusionary…

    • 1111 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    The definition of the exclusionary rule was a principle of law that illegally obtained evidence may not be admitted in court. The exclusionary rule was one of the few laws the court system had made to enforce the Forth Amendment’s unreasonable search and seizure clause. The many exceptions and alternatives to the rule caused major controversy over why the rule even stands.…

    • 490 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    In 1914, Weeks v. United States was decided by the Supreme Court. In Weeks, the Court made a landmark decision relating to illegal search and seizure by law enforcement called the Exclusionary Rule. The Exclusionary Rule provided that evidence “illegally seized by law enforcement officers in violation of a suspect’s right to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures cannot be used against the suspect in a criminal prosecution.” (Exclusionary Rule, 2010, p. 287). However, it was not until the 1961 case of Mapp v. Ohio that the Court made the Exclusionary Rule binding on the states…

    • 1210 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    To protect the American peoples 4th Amendment right “against unreasonable searches and seizures” from law enforcement using illegally seized evidence in a criminal trial against them, the exclusionary rule was created. The U.S. Supreme Court deemed any evidence illegally obtained inadmissible in a criminal trial, and any other evidence obtained during an illegal search and seizure inadmissible as well. This is known as the fruit of the poisonous tree doctrine.…

    • 197 Words
    • 1 Page
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    The exclusionary rule prohibits illegally obtained evidence from being used in a criminal trial (Hall, 2015). Furthermore, the exclusionary rule applies to prevent unconstitutionally obtained evidentiary submissions, and the rule is applicable to items or confessions (Hall, 2015). After reviewing the exclusionary rule I feel it should be applied to illegal arrests too, unless the police obtain sufficient evidence independent of the illegal arrest. In the case of State v. Eserjose police made an illegal arrest of the defendant for second-degree burglary; however, during an interview the Mr. Eserjose was read his Miranda rights, and he chose to waive his rights, ultimately confessing to the burglary (Ma, 2013). Subsequently, Mr. Eserjose’s…

    • 290 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Mapp V Ohio

    • 316 Words
    • 2 Pages

    and not states. This protection of privacy is stated in the Constitution, therefore the entire…

    • 316 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Ch 5 Gov

    • 968 Words
    • 4 Pages

    The exclusionary rule is a legal principle in the United States, under constitutional law, which holds that evidence collected or analyzed in violation of the defendant's constitutional rights is sometimes inadmissible for a…

    • 968 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    The exclusionary rule is for prohibiting illegal evidence in court, this can be a deciding factor in most cases. An example of this is, they can’t fake, or plant evidence.They have to have solid concrete evidence.This rule is part of the fourth amendment, which a lot of people take seriously, these are rights given to all Americans. I agree with this because, everything needs to be done in a proper manner. If the evidence leaves the chain of custody or is collected in an unlawful manner this can be a deciding factor in the case and a guilty person can be set free. Also if anyone can come up with the evidence than an innocent person may be sentenced. So it better to do things the right way first.…

    • 309 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    The exclusionary rule is a law that prohibits the use of illegally obtained evidence in a criminal trial. The U.S. Supreme Court developed the rule to discourage police from violating the Fourth Amendment right to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures. A lot of police feel as when they have their badge on there able to do anything and everything which isn't fair to the everyday citizen.…

    • 548 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Supreme Court put into law the exclusionary rule. The exclusionary rule has been in existence since the early 1900’s. This rule prohibits the use of evidence in a criminal trial when evidence is collected illegally; it gives protection to citizens who have been searched illegally by law enforcement who obtain illegal evidence for a conviction (Shestokas, 2014). The exclusionary rule has an extension called, Fruit of the Poisonous Tree doctrine (1920). The fruit of the poisonous tree doctrine was established primarily to deter law enforcement from violating rights against unreasonable searches and seizures (American Law 2008).…

    • 1010 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays