The Exclusionary Rule and Searches and Seizures

Solution Preview

Define how the Exclusionary Rule has affected the use of evidence acquired from police search and seizure cases.
Under the Fourth Amendment, protection against unreasonable searches and seizures is generally applicable to everyone of those accused of a crime, citizens, immigrants (legal or illegal), or visitors of the United States. These people have the right to forever be secure in their persons, houses, papers and effects against all unreasonable searches and seizures. The rule specifically applies to law enforcement personnel and not private citizens. The court made Exclusionary Rule was established to exclude evidence obtained in violation of one's fourth amendment rights. The exclusionary rule judges the admissibility of evidence based on how evidence is acquired, rather than what the evidence may prove. The fruit of the poisonous tree concept, which stems from the exclusionary rule, provides that in certain cases, when an illegal action is used by police or prosecution to gain any incriminating evidence, all evidence obtained to which stemmed from the illegal action can possibly not be used or seen by the jury or be grounds for a mistrial. In theory, the exclusionary rule has provided more regulation for how evidence is acquired against a defendant and further emphasizes protection against illegal searches and seizures for defendants.

Compare and contrast each of the following cases and the effects that the ruling decision by the Supreme Court has had on evidence obtained from police search and seizure.
Weeks- In Weeks v United States, Weeks was arrested at his home. The police officer searched his house without a search warrant. The officer found letters and mail that was used to send lottery tickets. Later, a US Marshall and police officers searched Week's house a second time without a search warrant. They seized letters and documents. Weeks filed a complaint to retrieve his papers. Some of his ...