Is the Fourth Amendment exclusionary rule weaker or stronger today compared to the periods of the Weeks and Mapp decisions? Why has this occurred? Do you think this is a good or bad trend? Explain your position and provide examples
What will be an ideal response?
The Fourth Amendment exclusionary rule is weaker today compared to the period of
the Mapp decision, but stronger than the period of the Weeks decision. Weeks dealt
only with federal prosecutions. Today's rule applies to all prosecutions. Mapp was
a clear statement of the rule that placed the burden on police. Since Mapp
exceptions have been announced that bring some real application to play in applying
the rule. For example, the good faith exception makes evidence admissible, even
though the rules were violated, as long as the law enforcement officers were acting
in a good faith effort to uphold constitutional rights. I think this is a good trend.
You might also like to view...
Discuss why child abuse has not historically been considered a crime
What will be an ideal response?
What type of bond bases release on the defendant's signature with a promise to return for trial?
a. property bond b. signature bond c. unsecured bond d. release on recognizance
Answer the following statement(s) true (T) or false (F)
1. When Congress acts within its enumerated powers, Congress can preempt state law 2. In recent Tenth Amendment cases the Supreme Court has ruled to increase federal power. 3. In recent Eleventh Amendment cases the Supreme Court has ruled to increase federal power. 4. The Full Faith and Credit Clause obligates the states to recognize the judgments and laws of the other states. 5. A state cannot be sued in federal court without that state’s consent.
What is the principle establishing the value and authority of precedent?
A. ex post facto B. corpus juris C. habeas corpus D. stare decisis