13. Exclusionary Rule Flashcards
what is the exclusionary rule?
judge made doctrine that prohibits introduction of evidence obtained in violation of a defendant’s Fourth, Fifth, and Sixth Amendment rights
what is the consequence of the exclusionary rule being applied?
unconstitutionally obtained evidence is inadmissible at trial and all “fruit of the poisonous tree” must also be excluded
what is “fruit of the poisonous tree”?
evidence obtained from exploitation of the unconstitutionally obtained evidence
what are the exceptions to the fruit of the poisonous tree doctrine? (5)
1) fruits derived from statements obtained in NON-purposeful violations of Miranda
2) evidence obtained from an independent source
3) evidence for which the causal link between police misconduct and evidence is broken (so attenuated to be remote)
4) evidence that would have inevitably been discovered even without misconduct
5) violations of the knock and announce rule
can a defendant exclude a witness’ in-court identification by arguing that it is the fruit of an unlawful detention?
no
when can a defendant exclude out of court identifications?
when such identifications were made unduly suggestive (by police) and create a substantial likelihood of misidentification
what is the good faith reliance defense to the exclusionary rule?
exclusionary rule will not apply when the police arrest someone erroneously BUT in good faith thinking that they are acting pursuant to a valid arrest/search warrant
what are the exceptions to an officer’s good faith reliance on a defective warrant? (4)
1) affidavit underlying the warrant is so lacking in PC that no reasonable officer would have relied on it
2) affidavit underlying warrant is so lacking in particularity that no reasonable officer would have relied on it
3) officer/prosecutor lied to or misled the magistrate when seeking the warrant
4) magistrate is biased (no longer neutral)
when may excluded evidence still be used at trial?
to impeach the defendant’s credibility IF they decide to take the stand (can’t impeach others’ statements)
if illegal evidence is improperly admitted at trial, under what circumstances will the resulting conviction NOT be overturned on appeal?
when the government can show beyond a reasonable doubt that the error was harmless
when is an error “harmless”?
when there still would have been a conviction even without the illegal evidence
what is government’s burden in arguing that evidence should be admissible?
by a preponderance of the evidence
may a defendant’s testimony at a suppression hearing be used against them at trial on the issue of guilt?
no
