+1000. However, I'd like to ask a related question. When obtaining a search warrant, the officer is required to specify what it is he is looking for. Drugs, guns, kiddie porn, bloodstained clothes, whatever. It cannot be a fishing expedition; what is admissible in court if found is limited to that search warrant; if you look for drugs and find kiddie porn, it's inadmissible. My question is whether that also applies to a post-arrest search, because it does not seem to. If you arrest someone for murder, then while they're cuffed and being led out the officers also find drugs in the apartment, such a discovery seems to be admissible, plain sight or otherwise. Anyone with more knowledge on this matter care to comment?srothstein wrote:Actually, this is a long standing policy of the SCOTUS. It is the good faith exception to the exclusionary rule. Basically if the cop making the arrest had a valid reason to believe he was operating in accordance with the law, and he is operating on this belief in good faith that what he does is legal, then the exclusionary rule does not apply. The logic is that this type of incident would not be deterred by the exclusionary rule.
Search found 1 match
Return to “SC Rules 5-4 Illegaly obtained evidence OK”
- Sun Jan 18, 2009 11:32 pm
- Forum: Federal
- Topic: SC Rules 5-4 Illegaly obtained evidence OK
- Replies: 8
- Views: 2411