Evidence Commons^™

Errors In Good Faith: The Leon Exception Six Years Later, David Clark Esseks

Michigan Law Review

Given this vast literature on the good faith exception, little room appears to exist for additional commentary on the propriety of the decision, its theoretical weaknesses or strengths, or what further changes in constitutional criminal procedure it forebodes. This Note will not add to the many voices complaining of the Court's misconstrual of the grounding of the exclusionary rule, nor of its crabbed notion of deterrence. Instead, it accepts, arguendo, the propriety of the exception and its underlying purpose, and then examines the six-year experience with the revised rule. The proliferation of reported applications of the good faith exception …

Where To Draw The Guideline: Factoring The Fruits Of Illegal Searches Into Sentencing Guidelines Calculations, Cheryl G. Bader, David S. Douglas

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Search And Seizure Exclusionary Rule, Department Of Justice Office Of Legal Policy

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

The fourth amendment guarantees the "right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures." This guaranty is not self-executing, however, and the courts and criminal justice systems in this country have long been bedeviled by questions concerning appropriate methods of ensuring its observance. As a result of the Supreme Court's decisions in Weeks v. United States and Mapp v. Ohio, the method principally relied upon today is a judicially created rule excluding from criminal trials evidence obtained in violation of the defendant's fourth amendment rights.

The search and seizure …

Reverse Silver Platter: Should Evidence That State Officials Obtained In Violation Of A State Constitution Be Admissible In A Federal Criminal Trial?

Washington and Lee Law Review

No abstract provided.

Dismantling The Exclusionary Rule: United States V. Leon And The Courts Of Washington—Should Good Faith Excuse Bad Acts?, Catherine Cruikshank

Seattle University Law Review

This Note will review briefly the history of the exclusionary rule under fourth amendment jurisprudence, with special emphasis given to the purposes the rule has traditionally been thought to serve. The significance of the Leon decision then will be examined in light of the emergence in Washington of an interpretation of article I, section 7 that diverges from the Supreme Court's interpretations of the fourth amendment. This Note will conclude by discussing how article I, section 7 continues to embody the several purposes traditionally served by the exclusionary rule.

Forgotten Points In The "Exclusionary Rule" Debate, James Boyd White

Michigan Law Review

Most contemporary discussions of the "exclusionary rule" assume or assert that this "rule" is not part of the fourth amendment, nor required by its terms, but is rather a judicial "remedy" that was fashioned to protect those rights (against unreasonable search and seizure) that actually are granted by the fourth amendment. The protection is said to work by "deterring" official violations; this is, however, an odd use of the word, for the rule does not punish violations but merely deprives the government of some of the benefits that might ensue from them, namely the use in the criminal case of …

Criminal Procedure—Scope Of The Exclusionary Rule—Inevitable Discovery Exception Adopted, Melanie J. Strigel

University of Arkansas at Little Rock Law Review

No abstract provided.

United States V. Payner--Constriction Of The Federal Courts' Supervisory Power, Mary Rich Lewis

West Virginia Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Effects Of Tucker On The Fruits Of Illegally Obtained Statements, Jeffery P. Reinhard

Cleveland State Law Review

Although the Court has been careful to point out that illegally obtained statements are not admissible in the prosecution's case in chief, Michigan v. Tucker has done much to erode even that principle. In Tucker, the Court found admissible the testimony of a witness whose identity was learned solely on the basis of a statement obtained from the defendant in violation of the guidelines set forth in Miranda. Despite the Court's statement that it was significant that the interrogation preceded Miranda, and notwithstanding its reiteration of the principle that the defendant's statements would not have been admissible in the prosecution's …

Controlling The Police: The Judge's Role In Making And Reviewing Law Enforcement Decisions, Wayne R. Lafave, Frank J. Remington

Michigan Law Review

We have chosen to focus here upon judicial involvement (1) in determining whether arrest and search warrants should issue and (2) in reviewing such decisions after they have been executed (and, perhaps, made) by police officials. A comparison of some recent findings respecting the actual practice at the trial level with the "ideal" as set forth in appellate opinions may allow some conclusions to be drawn both as to the present effectiveness of appellate rulings on these subjects and as to the ultimate feasibility of further implementation of those rulings. Finally, since the exclusionary rule is, theoretically at least, one …

Evidence-Hearsay-Exclusion Of Self-Serving Declarations, John M. Price S.Ed.

Michigan Law Review

One of the most venerable of all legal principles is the evidentiary rule excluding hearsay. This rule, which was first espoused by the English courts in the sixteenth century, arose when it became apparent that there was an inherent danger of untrustworthiness in a witness's uncorroborated recital of a prior declaration made outside the courtroom. The courts gave several reasons for regarding hearsay as untrustworthy. First, these statements, offered into evidence for the truth of the matter asserted, were not made under oath. Secondly, objection to such testimony was raised because the trier of fact had no opportunity to pass …

Evidence-Confessions-Admissiblity Of A Subsequent Confession Under The Mcnabb-Mallory Doctrine, Ira J. Jaffe S.Ed.

Michigan Law Review

Defendant was indicted for first degree murder and convicted of manslaughter in the Federal District Court for the District of Columbia. Defendant had willingly directed the police to the victim's body and voluntarily signed a written confession during a period of thirty-four hours detention prior to arraignment. At the arraignment defendant was informed of his rights and indicated that he was aware of them; in addition, the preliminary hearing was postponed in order to provide him opportunity to obtain counsel. Twenty hours after his arraignment the defendant once again voluntarily confessed while giving a police officer instructions as to the …

Scientific Investigation And Defendants' Rights, B. J. George Jr.

Michigan Law Review

Advances in science, medicine and industry have made much of the world a more pleasant place in which to live. In general more men are living a physically more satisfying life in more comfortable surroundings than preceding generations. But with this has come a parallel increase in criminality to the point that the term "crime wave" is heard with increasing frequency. Many crimes are facilitated in their commission by adaption or application of new scientific discoveries by criminal elements. A natural consequence is that already overburdened police departments turn as quickly as is financially possible to new scientific techniques in …

Criminal Law - Evidence - Wiretapping, James A. Park

Michigan Law Review

Suspecting that petitioner and others were violating state narcotics laws, New York police tapped petitioner's telephone pursuant to a warrant obtained in accordance with New York law. Acting upon information thus gained the police apprehended petitioner's brother. In his possession was found, not the narcotics as suspected, but alcohol without the tax stamps required by federal law. This evidence was turned over to federal authorities. Prosecution for possessing and transporting distilled spirits without tax stamps thereon followed, during which petitioner's motion to suppress the evidence obtained through the wiretap was denied. The Second Circuit affirmed the conviction, holding that although …

Judge And The Crime Burden, John Barker Waite

Michigan Law Review

One does not happily charge the judiciary with responsibility for the country's burden of crime, but the responsibility does in fact exist. Judges, though they may not encourage crime, interfere with its prevention in various ways. They deliberately restrict police efficiency in the discovery of criminals. They exempt from punishment many criminals who are discovered and whose guilt is evident. More seriously still, they so warp and alter the public's attitude toward crime and criminals as gravely to weaken the country's most effective crime preventive.

Morgan: Basic Problems Of Evidence, Alfred L. Gausewitz

Michigan Law Review

A Review of Basic Problems of Evidence. By Edmund M. Morgan.

Constitutional Law-Fourth Amendment-Exclusion Of Contraband Evidence Obtained By An Illegal Search On Premises Not Owned By Defendant, Edgar A. Strause

Michigan Law Review

The defendant was in the unlawful possession of narcotics. Having been given a key by his two aunts to their hotel room with authority to use the room at will, defendant stored the narcotics there without the knowledge of the occupants. A federal officer entered the hotel room, searched the room, and seized the narcotics during the absence of the occupants, without a search warrant. The defendant was arrested the following day and claimed ownership of the seized narcotics. He was convicted in the District Court of the District of Columbia for violation of federal law, the court refusing to …

Constitutional Law-Due Process Of Law-Freedom From Unreasonable Search And Seizure-The Admissibility Of Illegally Seized Evidence, Bernard Goldstone S.Ed.

Michigan Law Review

Local police officers entered the private office of petitioner, a practising physician, without a warrant and seized his private books and records. As a result of the information thus obtained, petitioner was convicted of conspiracy to perform an abortion. Petitioner claimed that his constitutional rights were invaded contending that due process of law under the Fourteenth Amendment includes freedom from unreasonable search and seizure and prevents the admission of illegally seized evidence, but this was denied by the Supreme Court of Colorado and the conviction was affirmed. On certiorari to the Supreme Court of the United States, held, affirmed, …