200
A police investigator asked the Coffee County’s warrant clerk if there were any warrants out for Herring’s (defendant) arrest. When none were found, the investigator asked the clerk to check with the clerk in Dale County, who reported that there was one active arrest warrant on defendant. The investigator asked that a copy of the arrest warrant be faxed over as confirmation.
However, when the Dale County clerk looked for the actual warrant she could not find it and discovered that the warrant had been RECALLED. She immediately called to tell the Coffee County clerk, who radioed to tell the investigator.
However, the investigator had already pulled Herring over, arrested him and, after conducting a search of his car, found drugs and a gun. Herring was charged with illegally possessing drugs and a gun. He moved to exclude the evidence for 4th Am. violation. Does he have a chance to prevail?
No!
The purpose of exclusionary rule is to?
In this case, the Coffee County officers behaved properly, even going so far as to request confirmation of the outstanding arrest warrant.
Herring v. U.S. (2009)