What Is the Exclusionary Rule? What Are Common Situations Where It Applies? Are There Exceptions? How Has It Changed Criminal Law?
One of the hallmarks of American democracy is the right of citizens to be free from unreasonable search or seizure, as set forth in the 4th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. The guarantee allows individuals to refuse access to law enforcement officers who do not have probable cause.
But what happens when police conduct a search or seizure without regard for a person’s constitutional rights? How do courts protect your constitutional rights when an illegal search or seizure has already taken place? That’s when the exclusionary rule applies.
What Is the Exclusionary Rule?
The exclusionary rule is a rule of evidence first established by the Supreme Court in 1914 in the case of Weeks v. United States. The rule bans from use in a criminal trial any evidence that has been obtained in violation of the defendant’s constitutional rights. The constitutional support for the exclusionary rule can be found in both the 4th Amendment’s right to be free from unreasonable search and seizure and the 5th Amendment’s provision that no person “shall be deprived of life, liberty or property without due process of law.”
The exclusionary rule applies in all state and federal criminal prosecutions and can be far-reaching in scope and impact. The prevailing interpretation of the rule renders any “fruit of the poisonous tree” inadmissible at trial. That includes any evidence obtained after an illegal search or seizure if the illegal search or search somehow led to the finding of that subsequent evidence. In extreme cases, the rule can apply to exclude virtually all evidence in a case and can be grounds for mistrial or dismissal of charges.
Common Examples of Application of the Exclusionary Rule
The most frequent instances where the exclusionary rule has been employed include:
- Entry into a person’s home or motor vehicle without a valid warrant or some other form of probable cause
- Wiretaps placed without legal authority
- Statements obtained from defendants through coercion or in violation of Miranda rights
- Unlawful traffic stops, where law enforcement officers do not have reasonable suspicion or probable cause to search the driver or vehicle
What Are Exceptions to the Exclusionary Rule?
Courts have found a number of permissible exceptions to the rule:
- Where prosecutors can show that the evidence would inevitably have been discovered through legal means—For example, if law enforcement officers illegally search a building and discover a dead body, but they can show that they had already applied before the illegal search for a warrant that would have been issued, then the discovery of the body may be considered inevitable, and the court may allow evidence of its discovery.
- Where police obtain the evidence through an independent source—This typically involves evidence obtained through a valid search warrant after police have discovered the same evidence through an illegal search.
- Good faith reliance on an invalid search warrant—If law enforcement officers reasonably believed they had a legal right to conduct a search or seizure, the evidence may be admissible.
The Impact of the Exclusionary Rule
The impact of the exclusionary rule has been subject to debate since its inception. While it may ostensibly lead to fewer convictions, and may have an impact on plea bargaining, the general consensus is that it applies to a very small percentage of cases, mostly involving minor offenses.