The Constitution has had many amendments since it first went into effect on March 4, 1789. The fourth amendment to the Constitution makes a provision called the Exclusionary Rule, which dictates that citizens are to be protected against unreasonable searches and seizures. The logic that led to the formation of this rule was based in the need to deter law enforcement officers from obtaining information through illegal means. By extension, police corruption could be brought down, and an individual’s Fourth Amendment Rights could be better safeguarded. There are, however, exceptions to the exclusionary rule, in cases like the following.
When the proof comes from an independent source
In the event that a law enforcement officer enter a premise legally, but without violating the Constitutional rights of an individual, and evidence is obtained, which is not linked to the original entry that was obtained illegally, then this entry will be admitted in court. If it is found that the evidence was obtained in an unconstitutional manner, then it will be exclude from the hearing in a court of law.
If the discovery of the evidence was inevitable
Though it has been ruled by the Supreme Court that evidence that was unconstitutional search and seizure not be allowed in court, evidence that is considered to have been discovered inevitably, would be exempted from such treatment. This holds true even for illegally obtained evidence.
When the relation between the evidence and the illegality is attenuated
If the evidence furnished in the court is shown to be related only very weakly to the illegal circumstances under which it was obtained, this will constitute evidence admissible in court. The reasons for attenuation can be either the duration of time, or other cause of action.
If the evidence was given in good faith
If in the obtaining of evidence the police officer adheres to the outlines of a state statute or local ordinance, which itself is viewed by the Supreme Court as unconstitutional, then the evidence thus obtained is admissible. The emphasis is on the court’s recognition of the fact that the officer acted in good faith, and not with any malicious intent.
These are some of the cases where even unconstitutionally obtained evidence can prove to be exceptions to the exclusionary rule. Further information on this topic would be revealed from various legal resource websites on the web.Google+