Exclusionary Rule

bright-line rule

a clear rule that is understood by police officers and to all situations

Rochin v. California

developed the test of "shocking the conscience" evidence was excluded because officers obtained it wrongfully

independent source rule

exception to exclusionary rule that permits the use of improperly obtained evidence that was also discovered through seperate legal means

attenuation doctrine

exception to exclusionary rule, "purged taint" exception, permits improperly obtained evidence when a subsequent event removes the "taint" of the constitutional violation that led to the discovery of the evidence

inevitable discovery rule

exception to the exclusionary rule that permits the use of improperly obtained evidence when it would have been discovered eventually through legal means

Weeks v. US

exclusionary rule is applied only to federal cases

Wolf v. Colorado

incorporation of 4th amendment to the states; alternatives to exclusion [internal discipline]

Mapp v. Ohio

incorporation of exclusionary rule to states; declared essentail to make 4th amendment meaningful; made it a blue-line rule

exclusionary rule

legal principle that evidence obtained illegally cannot be used against a person in trial

"good faith" exception

permits the use of illegally seized evidence when police act in honest reliance on a warrant improperly issued

collateral use exception

the legal use of improperly obtained evidence. cant use illegally obtained evidence to prove guilt but can be used to show he not trustworthy

"fruit of the poisonous tree" doctrine

when evidence is obtained by improper means, any further evidence discovered indirectly as a result of the improper search or interrogation is also excluded because it has been tainted by the initial rights violation.