Advanced Criminal Procedure: The Exclusionary Rule, Evidence Exceptions, and Law Enforcement Ethics
Administrative Information and Course Logistics
Final Examination Details * The final exam will be conducted in an open-note and open-textbook format. * The exam window is scheduled to open in June. * Students will have a time limit of hours to complete the assessment. * Question Format: The exam consists of essay questions. * Grading Weight: Each essay question is worth points. The instructor emphasizes that providing detailed responses is preferable to brief ones (e.g., an introduction and body paragraphs are expected, rather than four full pages per question).
Grading Scale and Extra Credit * Total Course Points: The total points for the course amount to . * Extra Credit Opportunity: Students can earn extra points by completing the "web research progress" assignment. The instructor notes this can be the difference between a grade of "A" and "B." * The minimum requirement to pass the course is a GPA, provided instructions are followed carefully.
The Exclusionary Rule
Definition and Core Principle * The exclusionary rule is a legal mandate that requires courts to ban the introduction of "good evidence" (reliable evidence) if it was obtained through "bad law enforcement" (unconstitutional or illegal methods). * This rule is a standard primarily unique to the legal system of the United States.
Justifications for the Exclusionary Rule * Constitutional Rights: The 4th, 5th, 6th, and 14th Amendment rights would be rendered meaningless if the court lacked the ability to exclude evidence obtained improperly. * Judicial Integrity: This justification argues that courts should not participate in or approve of unconstitutional behavior by law enforcement. It emphasizes that detectives and investigators must be truthful and lawful when submitting warrant affidavits to magistrates, basing them on facts and circumstances that warrant the seizure of evidence. * Deterrence: The primary purpose of the rule is to deter and prevent unconstitutional conduct by government officers by removing the incentive to ignore constitutional protections.
The Social Cost of the Exclusionary Rule * The application of the rule often comes at a high social cost, which includes the potential for freeing guilty individuals and undermining the prosecution's case. * Because of this cost, the Supreme Court of the United States focuses its application of the rule primarily on cases where it will effectively deter bad police conduct.
Search and Seizure: The Case of Abandoned Property
- Trash Collection and Warrants * Law enforcement does not typically require a warrant to search an individual's trash once it has been discarded. * Reasoning: When items are placed in a receptacle and put on a public curb or street, they are considered discarded and public. Anyone in the public has access to them, and the original owner has relinquished their expectation of privacy. * Investigative Use: Detectives frequently go through suspects' garbage looking for specific items, including: * Receipts. * Bloody clothing. * Murder weapons. * DNA sources (e.g., bottles, fingerprints).
Exceptions to the Exclusionary Rule
Collateral Use * Illegally obtained evidence is admissible in non-trial settings. These include: * Bail hearings. * Preliminary hearings. * Grand jury proceedings. * Habeas corpus proceedings. * Definition of Habeas Corpus: Derived from Latin for "bring the body forth." It is a proceeding where the government must prove a lawful, constitutional reason for detaining an individual.
Cross-Examination and Impeachment * Prosecutors may use illegally obtained evidence during cross-examination to undermine or impeach the credibility of a defense witness or the defendant. * If a defendant testifies and portrays themselves as having never done anything wrong, the prosecution can introduce previously excluded evidence (like a videotaped interview) to demonstrate a disconnect between their testimony and prior statements.
Independent Source Exception * Tainted evidence is considered admissible if, after a constitutional violation occurs, officers later obtain the same evidence through a totally separate and lawful fashion.
Inevitable Discovery Exception * Tainted evidence is admissible if the government can prove that the evidence would have eventually been discovered anyway through lawful means, even without the initial illegal police conduct.
The Good Faith Exception * Case Reference: U.S. v. Leon (). * Definition: This exception allows the government to use evidence obtained from searches based on unlawful search warrants, provided the officers honestly and reasonably believed the warrants were lawful at the time of execution. * Rationale: If an officer acts in good faith—meaning they did their due diligence, established a fact pattern, and believed they had probable cause that was signed off by a magistrate—there is no police misconduct to deter.
Law Enforcement Hiring and Ethical Standards
The Hiring Process * Agencies utilize polygraph tests (the "machine") to detect deception in applicants. The goal is to ensure candidates are honest, have character, and are in good standing. * Applicants must complete an exhaustive life history packet covering past residences, coworkers, neighbors, and all past behaviors. * Specific Disclosures: * Traffic Tickets: Applicants should be honest about the estimated number of tickets received rather than giving a definitive false answer. * Drug Use: Heavy drug use is a disqualifier, though some agencies may allow exceptions for "experimental use" of marijuana in the distant past. * Credit Issues: Significant financial problems are scrutinized because they may make an officer more susceptible to being bribed.
The "Lockberg" Agreement and Domestic Violence * Law enforcement and military personnel must often sign a "Lockberg" agreement annually. * This agreement involves swearing that the individual has not been convicted of any domestic violence (DV) crimes. * Firearm Possession: A domestic violence conviction is a disqualifier for law enforcement because such individuals are legally prohibited from carrying a firearm. * Mental Health: Many departments offer counselors and mental health services. Officers are encouraged to seek help for alcohol problems or personal stress before behaviors escalate to physical violence.
Questions & Discussion
Student Question on Independent Source: A student asked for an example involving a detective "snooping" or looking through windows without a warrant, then later getting a warrant. * Response: The instructor noted that while surveillance (with binoculars or listening at a door) is a tool, improper snooping can jeopardize a case and lead to civil liability. A better example of the exception is when an officer enters a home with a warrant for Item A, does not find it, but discovers Item B (like another gun) in plain view. They can then secure a warrant for Item B because they were lawfully on the premises.
Discussion on ICE and Local Law Enforcement: A conversation occurred regarding the cooperation between local police and Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). * Cooperation Mechanisms: Local jails often notify ICE when a person with an active detainer (wanted for crimes like murder, rape, or child molestation) is in custody. * Political Conflict: The instructor and students discussed how "activist" political figures or judges may release individuals back into the community, forcing ICE to conduct arrests in public locations like shopping centers or near schools, which can lead to public safety concerns and use of force (e.g., tear gas). * Federal Grants and Funding: One student characterized federal funding for local agencies to help with immigration enforcement as "bribery" or "coercion." The instructor clarified that these are often federal grants designed to provide resources to agencies that lack the funding to uphold federal laws (Mutual Aid).