0
Hmmm....this looks exactly like the question posted for homework by my professor. Looks like somebody needs to think on their own and do their own homework. Just look up exclusionary rule. Also, this is an opinion question, so there really is no way to get an incorrect answer unless you can not support your theory.
Wiki User
∙ 13y ago
Wiki User
∙ 11y agoGenerally speaking, no, because of the exclusionary rule. However, on occasion, evidence seized under somewhat questionable or unclear circumstances IS ruled admissible.
There are two major exceptions to the exclusionary rule. They are inevitable discovery and good faith searches. In short, if the police can show that any evidence obtained by a illegal search would have reasonably been discovered by a later (legal) search that the police would have conducted had the first (illegal) search not already discovered the evidence, then the evidence can be admitted due to inevitable discovery. In the second case, if the arresting officer conducted a search due to bad information (e.g. a search warrant that was improperly issued, or an arrest warrant which which was no longer valid, but seemed so, due to clerical error) that the officer had no reason to suspect was bad, then the search is valid, since the officer was acting in good faith and was following what appeared to be proper procedure.
Add your answer:
Earn +20 pts
Evidence that is obtained illegally may not not be used in trial. What is this idea called?
exclusionary rule
Evidence that is obtained illegally may not be used in trial. What is this idea called?
exclusionary rule
Evidence that is obtained illegally may not be used in trial what is this idea called?
exclusionary rule
Evidence that is obtained illegally may not be used in a trial. What is this idea called?
exclusionary rule
Can illegally obtained email be used in a criminal case?
The accused has the right to challenge the admissibility of any evidence used against them at trial. Whether an e-mail or any other evidence is "illegally obtained" is subject to the interpretation of the court, not the accused. If the court rules that evidence is obtained unlawfully, it can be suppressed at trial and not considered.
Evidence that may not be used against a defendant in a criminal trial because it was obtained illegally is an example of the?
exclusionary rule
What is the rule that says evidence may not be used against a defendant in a criminal trial if it was obtained illegally.?
In law this is known as the exclusionary rule.
Can a letter opened illegally be used in court as evidence?
No, evidence obtained illegally, including letters that were opened without permission, is generally not admissible in court due to the exclusionary rule, which prohibits the use of illegally obtained evidence in legal proceedings.
What does the exclusionary rule dictate?
The exclusionary rule dictates that any evidence obtained with an improperly received search warrant or evidence obtained without any search warrant would be held inadmissible in a criminal trial.
The standard that illegally seized evidence cannot not be used at trial is known as the?
Mapp rule
Why may illegally seized evidence not be used in a trial?
any evidence will be described as illegal if there is proof that it was forcefully obtained,without permission properly investigated .
What is the main purpose of the exclusionary rule?
The Exclusionary Rule's purpose is to keep certain evidence from being used against you in a criminal trial. Police procedure in gathering evidence against you is heavily dictated by cases interpreting the Fourth Amendment. Evidence gathered in violation of your Constitutional rights is subject to the Exclusionary Rule.
