Six observations on the exclusionary rule
Article Abstract:
The exclusionary rule should be eliminated. The rule is not mandated by the Constitution, but was created by the Court as a prophylactic measure. Moreover, the Fourth Amendment could be enforced through alternative measures that would be more effective. The exclusionary rule has resulted in loss of evidence in a large number of criminal cases; at a conservative estimate of two percent, the rule affects some 55,000 criminal prosecutions per year, resulting in dismissal of the case in a majority of instances. Complete abolition of the rule would be preferable to establishing a good-faith defense to the rule.
Publication Name: Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy
Subject: Political science
ISSN: 0193-4872
Year: 1997
User Contributions:
Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:
Victims and the exclusionary rule
Article Abstract:
The exclusionary rule has been applied disproportionately to protect the guilty at the great cost to society of having criminals go unpunished. The rule should be reexamined by Congress, and its effectiveness should be evaluated from the viewpoint of the victims of crime. The exclusionary rule is a remedy created by the judiciary, not one compelled by the Constitution, and thus can be changed by Congress. A good-faith exception, for example, could help to moderate the effect of the exclusionary rule.
Publication Name: Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy
Subject: Political science
ISSN: 0193-4872
Year: 1996
User Contributions:
Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:
The virtues and vices of the exclusionary rule
Article Abstract:
The exclusionary rule's true costs and benefits have not been correctly evaluated. The exclusionary rule allows police conduct to be regulated without overdeterrence and enables the court to define the boundary of constitutional searches and seizures. In addition, the visibility of criminals who go free may act as a check by providing some accountability for judges. However, the rule also diverts attention and resources from the more important issues of guilt and innocence.
Publication Name: Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy
Subject: Political science
ISSN: 0193-4872
Year: 1997
User Contributions:
Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:
- Abstracts: Some observations on the dispute settlement system in the World Trade Organization. Treatment of autonomous liberalization in the WTO new service round: to give credit is to get more
- Abstracts: The Frustrations of Government Service. Sources and Consequences of Citizen Attitudes Toward Government. Working Group 4: Adapting, Concepts of Community to the Emerging Role of Citizens
- Abstracts: Deliberalization in Jordan. The future of structural reform. The Czech Republic's first decade
- Abstracts: Nicaragua: is the revolution over? The gendered effects of the reregulation of the Swedish welfare state. Incomplete revolutions: gendered participation in productive and reproductive labour in Mozambique and Nicaragua
- Abstracts: The senate resolution on NATO expansion. The debate over NATO expansion: a critique of the Clinton administration's responses to key questions