The Rise and Fall of the Constitutional Exclusionary Rule in the United States
28 Pages Posted: 30 Jan 2015
Date Written: 2010
Abstract
In 1961 the United States Supreme Court held in Mapp v. Ohio that the exclusion of evidence obtained as a result of an unconstitutional search or seizure is required in state criminal trials as a matter of federal constitutional law. Two further cases decided in 1964 and 1966 created federal constitutional exclusionary rules for illegally obtained confessions based on the constitutional right to counsel and the right against compelled self-incrimination. The evidentiary exclusionary rules created in these landmark cases continue to be the principal tool for enforcing constitutional rights applicable in criminal prosecutions. Over the past fifty years, however, the constitutional foundations of the exclusionary rules have shifted and their scope has narrowed. At one time the exclusion of evidence obtained as a result of a violation of the constitution was understood to be required as a constitutional mandate. The Supreme Court has now explicitly rejected that view in favor of an interpretation that regards the exclusionary rules as judicially created prophylactic remedies whose purpose is to deter future violations. Consistent with this understanding of exclusion as a forward-looking preventive measure, the Court has limited the application of the exclusionary rule to circumstances where the deterrent benefits of exclusion are considered to outweigh the costs in terms of lost evidence.
Suggested Citation: Suggested Citation
Do you have negative results from your research you’d like to share?
Recommended Papers
-
Gravity and the Legitimacy of the International Criminal Court
-
International Idealism Meets Domestic-Criminal-Procedure Realism
-
Good Faith, Bad Faith and the Gulf between: A Proposal for Consistent Terminology
-
Marshalling the Data: An Empirical Analysis of Canada’s s. 24(2) Case Law in the Wake of R. v. Grant
By Mike Madden
-
The Exclusion of Improperly Obtained Evidence in Greece: Putting Constitutional Rights First
-
Debunking Five Great Myths About the Fourth Amendment Exclusionary Rule
-
One Problem, Two Paths: A Taiwanese Perspective on the Exclusionary Rule in China
By Yu-jie Chen