Exclusionary Rule

Question 1

Exclusionary Rule

Answer 1

remedy where someone who is victim of an illegal search or coerced confession can have the results of the illegal search or confession from the coerced statement EXCLUDED from any subsequent criminal prosecution

Question 2

Limits on Exclusionary Rule (evidence can still come in)

Answer 2

1. Exclusion doesnt apply to GRAND JURY proceedings
   a. a grand jury witness may be compelled to testify based on illegally obtained evidence
2. Exclusion isnt available remedy in civil proceedings
3. Exclusion is not an available remedy in parole revocations proceedings

**4. Exclusion doesnt apply to the use of excluded evidence for impeachment purposes. All illegally seized evidence may be admitted to IMPEACH CREDIBILITY of the D’s trial testimony (like miranda violations). Only the defendant’s trial testimony may be impeached, not the testimony of other defense witnesses

5. Exclusion isnt available for violations of the Knock and Announce Rule in execution of search warrants

Question 3

The Fruit of the Poisonous Tree Doctrine

Answer 3

1. excludes illegally seized evidence as well as all evidence obtained/derived from police illegality. What grows from the tree: if tree is poisonous, so is the fruit resulting from it
2. Good Faith: when police act in good faith, in executing warrant (wrong police report, info in warrant incorrect from informant)
3. Three ways the govt can break chain between orgiinal/unlawful police action and some supposedly derived piece of information:
   a. govt could show that it had INDEPENDENT SOURCE, for that evidence, independent of that original police illegallity
   b. INEVITABLE DISCOVERY: police doulve discovered evidence anyway
   c. INTERVENING ACTS OF FREE WILL on the part of the defendant

Question 4

Exclusionary Rule and Convictions

Answer 4

1. Conviction will not necessarily be overturned because improperly obtained evidence was admitted at trial
2. On appeal, court will apply the HARMLESS ERROR test: a conviction will be upheld if the convicition would have resulted despite the improper evidence