Critics of the Exclusionary Rule claim that it sets the criminals free due to technicalities even though the Supreme Court has depended upon three justifications of the rule. The three rationales for the Exclusionary Rule are:
- Protect citizens from unlawful search and seizure since it is grounded on the Fourth Amendment of the Bills of Rights.
- The Exclusionary Rule offers remedy and protection for criminal prosecution from police and prosecutors who illegitimately collect evidence, which violates Fifth Amendment’s immunity against self-incrimination.
- Protects against infringement of defendants’ right to counsel as guaranteed by the Sixth Amendment.
The Exclusionary Rule’s extension, “the Fruits of the Poisonous Tree” doctrine, shields the citizens from unwarranted searches. The law guarantees that any evidence acquired illegally cannot be used in a court of law against the defendant. It originates from the Fourth Amendment, which provides that every individual should be secure in their persons and homes (The Fourth Amendment and the exclusionary Rule’,2019). Nonetheless, there are three exceptions to the “the Fruits of the Poisonous Tree Doctrine.”
- Inevitable discovery exception. The exception refers to evidence admissible to the court, although it was initially gathered illegally. The rationale behind this doctrine is that the evidence would have been inescapably retrieved anyway.
- Good faith exception. The law allows the police to conduct search and seizure with objectively reasonable reliance even if the search is not legal.
- Independent evidence exception. The justification behind the doctrine is that if the evidence was first gathered illegally but rightfully found later, the evidence is admissible in court.
During the first appearance of the defendant in the court, the judge conducts four important tasks. Usually, the first appearance takes a short time as there is no hearing and cross-examining of the defendant. The first responsibility of the judge is to provide the defendant with a copy of the criminal complaint. The document contains the charges and the possible maximum sentence if found guilty. The second task is the first probable cause determination. At this level, the judge reviews the case and evaluates the facts to determine if the accused committed the said offense. The third action is where the judge informs the defendant of their right to counsel. Mostly, it happens when the accused appears before the court without an attorney. The last procedure for the first appearance in court is informing the accused of his or her right to a preliminary hearing. At the preliminary hearing, the judges decide not whether the defendant is guilty or not but whether the evidence collected is sufficient for the defendant to stand trial.
While testing the government’s case against the potential defendants, the state and federal prosecutors may choose to use a preliminary hearing procedure or the grand jury review. The two processes are almost similar since both are the first steps in criminal proceedings. The preliminary hearing is a procedure where the judge determines using probable cause standard whether the accused committed the crime and if the gathered evidence is enough for the offender to stand trial. The judge listens to arguments from both sides, starting with the prosecutor and then the defendant’s lawyer. On the other hand, grand jury review is mostly meant for serious felonies or crimes, and the grand jury comprises 16 to 23 jurors. Unlike the preliminary hearing, the grand jury review is highly confidential, and no judge or defendant’s attorney attends it. The jurors can examine testimonies and evidence presented by the prosecutor. Some evidence can be removed from the criminal trial if jurors realize it is not admissible for some reason.
Reference
The Fourth Amendment and the exclusionary Rule. (2019). FindLaw. Web.