Saturday, April 27, 2019

Case Study-Police and the Law Study Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1250 words

-Police and the Law - Case Study causaFor this reason, the Exclusionary Rule that is recognized by the joined States authoritative Court comes to primary importance. For purposes of this brief analysis, this author allow for utilize the fundamental precepts of the Exclusionary Rule alongside three specific cases, Weeks v. United States, Rochin v. California, and Mapp v. Ohio, to illustrate the progressions that the discriminative corpse has made with reference to realizing, appreciating, and categorizing the means by which evidence wad be legally and rightfully obtained as well as recognized inside a court of law. For purposes of clarity, the Exclusionary Rule will be defined within this analysis as a legal principle under constitutional law which states that some(prenominal) evidence that is collected which violates the rights of the defendant is non-admissible for criminal prosecution in a court of law. The importance of much(prenominal) a constraint is massive due to the fact that it helps to place much needed limits on the powers that the prosecuting entity, almost invariably that of law enforcement, can legally impose on an single(a) that is suspected of transgressing the law. For purposes of explanation, one can directly link the development and historical significance of the Exclusionary Rule to the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution. In much(prenominal) a way, the Exclusionary Rule can be understood as an expansion of the power that protects citizens from unlawful re chasees and seizures. As will be seen in the proceeding analysis, this obstacle against unlawful search and seizure can heretofore extend into cases which police and the requisite authorities have all necessary search warrants necessary to discharge a standard search (Fettig 2010). In this way, the unique level to which the exclusionary rule works within the judicial system helps to ensure that even if law enforcement representatives have requisite documentat ion, they are not allowed to deviate from a proscribed role in seeking to gain such evidence. As the following cases will show, a great deal of development has taken place within the Exclusionary Rule and the means by which the rights of the individual have been championed in place of granting greater and more expansive powers to law enforcement. With respect to the first of these cases, that of Weeks v. United States (1914), this was a case that set a level of precedent with relation to the Fourth Amendment and the application so to ensure that evidence gained during a warrantless seizure was inadmissible in a federal official court of law. The prohibition against allowing evidence procured in such a manner being admissible in a federal court of law was beyond merely disallowing federal agents to gather such evidence and present it within a federal court, it also prohibited federal agents from receiving evidence received in such a manner from being retrieved by their state or loc al counterparts. However, noticeably missing from this case was a prohibition against any evidence whatsoever being gathered or utilized in such a way (Campbell 2011). The case itself was concentric upon Weeks having his own possessions rifled and taken during a police search that did not have the power of a search warrant. As such, Weeks protests were eventually heard by the Supreme Court and the case itself was thrown out due to the majority opinion that such a search violated the soon to be elaborated upon Exclusionary Rule

No comments:

Post a Comment