Exclusionary Rule

Question 1

Exclusionary Rule - General Concept

Answer 1

• judge-made doctrine that prohibits introduction of ev obtained in violation of def’s Fourth, Fifth, and Sixth Am rights
• unconstitutionally obtained ev inadmissible at trial, and all “fruit of the poisonous tree” (ev obtained from exploitation of unconstitutionally obtained ev) must also be excluded unless costs of excluding it outweigh deterrent effect exclusion would have on police misconduct

Question 2

Exceptions to Fruit of Poisonous Tree Doctrine

Answer 2

• fruits derived from statements obtained in violation of Miranda
• evidence obtained from a source independent of the original illegality
• attenuation: ev for which connection between unconstitutional police conduct + ev is remote (considering whether misconduct purposeful or flagrant) or has been interrupted by intervening circumstance, so that causal link between police misconduct + ev is broken
  -> includes acts of free will by def
• inevitable discovery (prosecution can show police would’ve discovered ev even w/o acting unconstitutionally)
• violations of knock and announce rule

Question 3

Exceptions to Fruit of Poisonous Tree Doctrine - Three I’s

Answer 3

• independent source
• intervening act of free will on part of def
• inevitable discovery
• all three break chain from unlawful police act + make ev admissible

Question 4

Exclusionary Rule - Live Witness Testimony

Answer 4

• it is difficult to have live witness testimony excluded on exclusionary rule grounds

Question 5

Exclusionary Rule - In-Court Identification

Answer 5

• def may not exclude witness’s in-court id on grounds that it’s the fruit of an unlawful detention

Question 6

Exclusionary Rule - Out-of-Court Identifications

Answer 6

• unduly suggestive out-of-court identifications that create a substantial likelihood of misidentification can violate Due Process Clause of Fourteenth Amendment
• judged on case-by-case basis under totality of circumstances
• BUT court won’t consider applying exclusionary rule unless the unnecessarily suggestive circumstances were arranged by the police

Question 7

Limitations on the Exclusionary Rule

Answer 7

• inapplicable to grand juries, civil proceedings, violations of state law, internal agency rules, + parole revocation proceedings
• good faith reliance on law, defective search warrant, or clerical error
• use of excluded evidence for impeachment purposes

Question 8

Limitation on Exclusionary Rule - Good Faith Reliance

Answer 8

• exclusionary rule doesn’t apply when police arrest someone erroneously but in good faith thinking that they are acting pursuant to a valid arrest warrant, search warrant or law

Exceptions to this:
1) affidavit underlying the warrant relied on is so lacking in probable cause that no reasonable police officer would’ve relied on it
2) affidavit underlying the warrant is so lacking in particularity that no reasonable officer would’ve relied on it
3) police officer or prosecutor lied to or misled magistrate when seeking the warrant
4) magistrate is biased + therefore has wholly abandoned their neutrality

Question 9

Use of Excluded Ev for Impeachment Purposes

Answer 9

• some excluded ev can be used to impeach def’s credibility if def takes stand at trial
• otherwise voluntary confessions taken in violation of Miranda can be used for impeachment
• ev obtained from an illegal search can be used to impeach def’s, but not others’ statements

Question 10

Standard of Review on Appeal - Admission of Illegal Evidence

Answer 10

• harmless error test
• conviction should be overturned on appeal unless gov can show beyond reasonable doubt that the error was harmless (i.e. conviction would’ve resulted despite improper ev)
• in habeas proceeding where petitioner claims constitutional error, petitioner should be released if they can show the error had a substantial or injurious effect or influence in determining jury’s verdict

Question 11

Enforcing the Exclusionary Rule

Answer 11

• def is entitled to have admissibility of evidence or confession decided as matter of law by judge out of hearing of jury
• gov bears burden of establishing admissibility by preponderance of the evidence
• def has right to testify at suppression hearing w/o their testimony being admitted against them at trial on issue of guilt