0
How does the exclusionary rule under mapp v Ohio 1961 affect the way evidence is used in court?
Wiki User
∙ 10y ago
Yes. Although the Exclusionary Rule applied to federal cases since the decision in Weeks v. US, 232 US 383 (1914), the Supreme Court had resisted applying the rule to the states (Wolf v. Colorado, 338 US 25 (1949)) until the Warren Court held the circumstances presented in Mapp v. Ohio constituted an unacceptable Fourth Amendment infringement.
Case Citation:
Mapp v. Ohio, 367 US 643 (1961)
For more information, see Related Questions, below.
Wiki User
∙ 13y ago
Add your answer:
Earn +20 pts
What states that evidence obtained in an illegal search may not be introduced at trial?
The exclusionary rule states that evidence obtained in an illegal search or seizure may not be introduced at trial. This rule is based on the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which protects against unreasonable searches and seizures.
Which US Supreme Court case made the exclusionary rule applicable to seizures done by federal officers?
Weeks v. US, (1914) was the case that established the "exclusionary rule," preventing evidence gathered through illegal or unreasonable search and seizure of a suspect from being used to prosecute the suspect in court. This Fourth Amendment Search and Seizure protection originally applied only to federal casesbecause the Supreme Court hadn't incorporated much of the Bill of Rights to the States in 1914.Case Citation:Weeks v. US, 232 US 383 (1914)
What is inevitable discovery?
In a criminal procedure, the inevitable discovery rule allows evidence of a defendant's guilt to be admitted as evidence in a trial. The exclusionary rule judges the admissibility of evidence and under the constitutional law, the evidence collected or analyzed in violation of the defendant's constitutional rights is sometimes inadmissible for a criminal prosecution in a court of law. In simple terms, the inevitable discovery exception to the exclusionary rule allows into evidence illegally seized items that would have been discovered lawfully anyway. This exception allows evidence to be admitted, even though it was seized in violation of the Constitution. In order to successfully assert the inevitable discovery exception, some courts require that the prosecution demonstrate that the police were in the process of actively pursuing a lawful investigation that would have led inevitably to the discovery of the evidence at the time that the evidence was illegally obtained.
What is inevitable discovery rule?
In a criminal procedure, the inevitable discovery rule allows evidence of a defendant's guilt to be admitted as evidence in a trial. The exclusionary rule judges the admissibility of evidence and under the constitutional law, the evidence collected or analyzed in violation of the defendant's constitutional rights is sometimes inadmissible for a criminal prosecution in a court of law. In simple terms, the inevitable discovery exception to the exclusionary rule allows into evidence illegally seized items that would have been discovered lawfully anyway. This exception allows evidence to be admitted, even though it was seized in violation of the Constitution. In order to successfully assert the inevitable discovery exception, some courts require that the prosecution demonstrate that the police were in the process of actively pursuing a lawful investigation that would have led inevitably to the discovery of the evidence at the time that the evidence was illegally obtained.
Can legal evidence be used from an AA meeting in court?
Any legal evidence can be used in court. Most AA meetings, while held under the expectation of privacy and confidentiality, are not protected.
Who does the US Supreme Court affect?
Everyone under US jurisdiction.
What is the The rule that illegally obtained evidence cannot be used in court?
It is called the exclusionary rule (originating in 1769 England, it was not tested until 1886 in the United States: Boyd VS United States and a strong federal stance on the issue in 1914: Weeks VS United States).
Is person has little income and big assets can courts order child support based on assets?
Yes. As long as evidence of the the assets can be provided to the court. In fact, they need to be declared on the parent's financial statement to the court which is used to arrive at a figure under the state child support guidelines.Yes. As long as evidence of the the assets can be provided to the court. In fact, they need to be declared on the parent's financial statement to the court which is used to arrive at a figure under the state child support guidelines.Yes. As long as evidence of the the assets can be provided to the court. In fact, they need to be declared on the parent's financial statement to the court which is used to arrive at a figure under the state child support guidelines.Yes. As long as evidence of the the assets can be provided to the court. In fact, they need to be declared on the parent's financial statement to the court which is used to arrive at a figure under the state child support guidelines.
Can a joint tenant be removed from the contact if he signed under false pretence?
It would take a court order to do so. The evidence must be presented to the court.
If new evidence is disclosed that would have resulted in a different verdict what do you do?
File a motion to re-open the case based on newly discovered evidence under the appropriate court rule.
What constitutional issue was interpreted in Terry v. Ohio?
Terry v. Ohio, 392 US 1 (1968)The Fourth Amendment, specifically the Search and Seizure Clause and the Fourteenth Amendment. Terry's attorney attempted to have the "stop and frisk" technique labeled an unreasonable search and seizure in order to have any evidence discovered during the search suppressed under the Exclusionary Rule.The case also raised the question of whether the petitioner's Fourth Amendment right against unreasonable searches and seizure was made applicable to the States by the Fourteenth Amendment.The US Supreme Court found the "stop and frisk" technique constitutional when a "reasonably prudent officer" has concerns for his or others' safety. As a result, evidence produced from the search may be used against the defendant in court.For more information, see Related Questions, below.
Can the lower court refuse to send inmate photographs used at trial as evidence against them?
Evidence presented in court is not retained by the court. After the trial is concluded it is returned to the agency (agencies) that supplied it. If you need access to any of it you will have subpoena the agency to release them. If the case is still on-going (in trial, under appeal, etc), evidence in an ongoing case is never released. Your defense attorney had access to the same material, have you checked with them?
