Exclusionary Rule
What happens if evidence is obtained in violation of the Consistution?
If evidence was obtained in violation of the Constitution, the defendant may move to suppress the evidence, and the government has the burden by a preponderance of the evidence. Analyze the primary illegality and what evidence follows that violation.
How does one have standing to assert the exclusionary rule?
In order to have standing to assert the exclusionary rule, one’s personal fourth amendment rights must be violated
Your PERSONAL 4th amendment rights must be invaded by an illegal search to raise exclusionary rule as remedy for 4th amendment violation.
Does the exclusionary rule apply to violations of the knock and announce rule?
No, the exclusionary rule does not apply to violations of the knock and announce rule.
Under Hudson v. Michigan, the court held that the exclusionary rule does not apply to evidence gained after the police violated the knock and announce requirement because applying the exclusionary rule does not deter police misconduct since the knock and announce rule exists to protect officer safety.
What was the rule in Davis v. United States, in regards to the good faith rule?
The court held that a searches conducted in objectively reasonable reliance upon binding appellate precedent that has since been overruled is not subject to the exclusionary rule. Such a violation is made in good faith and excluding the evidence would not serve the purpose of deterrence.
What is the independent source exception?
Even if police obtain evidence in violation of the fourth amendment, it is still admissible if it is also obtained through a source independent of the police misconduct.
What is the Exclusionary Rule?
The exclusionary rule states that evidence obtained in violation of the Constitution cannot be introduced in the government’s case in chief, and neither can “fruits of the poisonous tree” or evidence that is obtained flowing from the primary illegality.
Do social guests have standing?
Social guests: likely have reasonable expectation of privacy but would have to count the votes of the Supreme Court to know for sure because has not been decided.
Can evidence obtained in violation of the Constitution be admitted to impeach the testimony of the defendant?
Yes. Evidence obtained in violation of the Constitution may be admitted to impeach the testimony of the defendant. A defendant cannot take the stand and lie – if D does, then the prosecution can impeach D’s testimony by confronting him with excluded evidence purpose is to show D is lying (evidence is not introduced against the D).
Principle: illegal search cannot be used as a shield to lie on the stand
What does a defendant have to do if he wants to challenge a search warrant because information is false?
Defendant who seeks to challenge search warrant because information is false: challenge actual affiant either made deliberate misrepresentations or reckless disregard for the truth. The level of proof: 1) must attack specific falsehood in warrant application and 2) must have supporting information for an offer of proof: an affidavit, sworn statement or other statement or explanation why there is no statement.
Take away from Franks: have to attack something specifically cannot just say the police officer was lying in the affidavit, instead need to describe specifically what they were lying about. And must have supporting information.
What is the inevitable discovery exception?
Even if police obtain evidence in violation of the fourth amendment, it is still admissible if it would have inevitably been discovered anyway.
The Nix v. Williams court says if prosecution can establish by a preponderance of the evidence that the information inevitably would have been discovered by lawful means, then the evidence should be admitted.
What are the 2 main principles for using the Exclusionary Rule?
Principles: deterrence of police misconduct and (to a lesser extent) judicial integrity.
Do overnight guests at a house have standing?
Yes, the Olson court held that an overnight guest has a reasonable expectation of privacy as an overnight guest.
Does the exclusionary rule apply to good faith violations?
No. The exclusionary rule only applies to deliberate or reckless violations of the fourth amendment or to those violations that are the result of systemic government policies; it does not apply to negligent or good faith violations of the fourth amendment.
To trigger the exclusionary rule police conduct must be sufficiently deliberate that exclusion can meaningfully deter it, and sufficiently culpable that such deterrence is worth the price paid by the justice system.
What was the rule in United States v. Leon, in regards to the good faith rule?
The court held that evidence obtained in reasonable, good faith reliance on a facially valid search warrant is not subject to the fourth amendment’s exclusionary rule, even if the warrant is later deemed defective. In such a circumstance (in absence of allegation that magistrate judge has abandoned detached and neutral role), the application of the exclusionary rule is only appropriate when officers were dishonest or reckless in preparing the affidavit for the warrant or if they could not have held an objectively reasonable belief in the existence of probable cause.
What is attenuation?
Attenuation is some sort of dissipation of the taint of that primary illegality – the initial thing you did was really bad, violation of an amendment but now some time or space has passed and we don’t consider the evidence that was later found to be related to that primary illegality.
How do fruit & standing interact?
Standing is a doctrine that will limit when evidence is excluded, and so will fruit of poisonous tree
By simply employing the fruits analysis, LOTS of evidence would be suppressed
By employing standing, as in Carter, some fruits would be suppressed against some individuals, but not against others (like in Payner IRS case)
Do guests who are at a home for business and short-term have standing?
No, do not have legitimate expectation of privacy/REP so cannot raise the illegality of the original search - no REP in house if interest is short-term and business-related.
The Carter court held that the two men did not have a reasonable expectation of privacy in Thompson’s home, since were there for business and did not stay very long.
Define the good faith definition?
Good faith definition: Even if there is no legal justification, we will excuse the officer’s 4th amendment violation, because the officer was acting in good faith relying on various things, as seen in the cases (investigation, database information, magistrates approval of a warrant).
What is the fruit of the poisonous tree?
When at some point police violate Constitution protections of a Defendant, then the evidence seized flows from that primarily illegality and when must evidence be suppressed --> Exclusionary rule
What is the attenuation exception? What are the factors to consider?
Even if police obtain evidence in violation of the fourth amendment, it is still admissible if the link between the illegal police act and the evidence is so attenuated that the evidence is no longer tainted by the original illegality.
Factors to look at: amount of time that has passed, intervening circumstances, purpose and flagrancy of the initial illegality.
Checklist to the Exclusionary Rule.
1. Standing
2. Exceptions to the Exclusionary Rule (Knock & Announce, Good Faith, and Impeachment)
3. Exceptions to Fruit of the Poisonous Tree (Independent Source, Inevitable Discovery, and Attenuation)
Explain the difference in rules between the cases, Rakas and Brendlin, in regard to passengers.
The court held that Rakas did not have standing to challenge the search because passengers are not seized when a car is stopped and Rakas had no property interest in the car or items found within it. One’s personal fourth amendment rights must be invaded by an illegal search to raise the exclusionary rule as a remedy.
Under Brendlin, passengers are seized so can challenge legality of the stop but central holding of Rakas still stands. Passengers are seized when riding in a car that is stopped - standing to challenge stop. Every occupant is seized under 4th amendment and each can challenge the legitimacy of the seizure and any search that follows.
Can illegally seized evidence be used in grand jury?
Yes. Post-warren court: illegally seized evidence can be used in grand jury process to procure indictment
What are the 3 exception to the Fruit of the Poisonous tree?
We exclude anything that is Fruit of Poisonous tree UNLESS one of these 3 exceptions apply:
These exceptions allow evidence to come in even if evidence should be excluded under the exclusionary rule.
Under U.S. v. Ceccolini, are live witnesses attenuated?
Live witness: testimony by a live witness is always attenuated—cannot suppress testimony by a live witness as fruit of the poisonous tree. (U.S. v. Ceccolini)