answersLogoWhite

0


Best Answer

It is called the exclusionary rule (originating in 1769 England, it was not tested until 1886 in the United States: Boyd VS United States and a strong federal stance on the issue in 1914: Weeks VS United States).

User Avatar

Wiki User

13y ago
This answer is:
User Avatar
More answers
User Avatar

Wiki User

15y ago

It is called the exclusionary rule. The basic principle is that if the police do not follow the law, then evidence obtained by violating the law is excluded from court. This is often the result of searches or seizures done in violation of the 4th Amendment and confessions obtained in violation of the rules of Miranda. For more information see the related links. ADDED: Also known as "The Fruit Of The Poisoned Tree" doctrine.

This answer is:
User Avatar

User Avatar

Wiki User

13y ago

amendment 4

The exclusionary rule is grounded in the Fourth Amendment and it is intended to protect citizens from illegal searches and seizures." The exclusionary rule is also designed to provide a remedy and disincentive, which is short of criminal prosecution in response to prosecutors and police who illegally gather evidence in violation of the Fifth Amendment in the Bill of Rights compelled to self-incrimination. The exclusionary rule also applies to violations of the Sixth Amendment, which guarantees the right to counsel.

The exclusionary rule originally often applies to evidence obtained through unauthorized search and seizure. Under the Fourth Amendment, a warrant, which required probable cause, should be obtained in order to conduct a search. A number of exceptions to the warrant requirement have developed, based on other interpretations of what "reasonableness" entails. A strict interpretation of the Fourth Amendment says that a search without a warrant is unreasonable. This interpretation is favored by civil liberties advocate. The rule was expanded in the 1960s to cover other aspects of law enforcement procedure, including "involuntary" confessions, suspect identification obtained in violation of the Fifth and Sixth Amendments, wiretapping evidence in violation of federal law, and other evidence obtained through very unreasonable or "shocking" means in violation of Constitutional rights. In Illinois, People v. Albea (1954) ruled that testimony from witnesses found in course of an unlawful search cannot be admitted into court.

This answer is:
User Avatar

User Avatar

Wiki User

14y ago

It is known as The Exclusionary Rule, and is based on several US Supreme Court rulings over the years that are based on the Fourth, Fifth and Sixth Amendments to the US Constitution.

There are some little-known exceptions to its usage, and it does not apply in ALL instances.

See below link for further information:

This answer is:
User Avatar

User Avatar

Wiki User

9y ago

The Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution is what prohibits the induction of unlawfully obtained evidence.

Also, in 1920 there was a famous case named Silverthorne Lumber Co. v. United States in which the Supreme Court created a new Doctrine called "Fruit of the Poisonous Tree Doctrine".

This Doctrine prohibits Government Officials from admitting before a court, evidence in which chain of custody, rules of evidence procedure, or lawful obtainment were not met. In any of these three issues are present in terms of evidence, the evidence must be suppressed, meaning it cannot be used against the accused.

Of course, over the years this Doctrine has changed and exceptions to the rule have been made as well.

This answer is:
User Avatar

User Avatar

Wiki User

10y ago

they don't know why wont't you answer it?

excusionary rule?

self-counsel rule ?

self-incrimination rule ?

double jeopardy rule ?

This answer is:
User Avatar

User Avatar

Wiki User

12y ago

exclusionary rule

This answer is:
User Avatar

User Avatar

Wiki User

13y ago

Exclusionary

This answer is:
User Avatar

Add your answer:

Earn +20 pts
Q: What is the The rule that illegally obtained evidence cannot be used in court?
Write your answer...
Submit
Still have questions?
magnify glass
imp
Continue Learning about American Government

What does the exclusionary rule dictate?

The exclusionary rule dictates that any evidence obtained with an improperly received search warrant or evidence obtained without any search warrant would be held inadmissible in a criminal trial.


What is the main purpose of the exclusionary rule?

The Exclusionary Rule's purpose is to keep certain evidence from being used against you in a criminal trial. Police procedure in gathering evidence against you is heavily dictated by cases interpreting the Fourth Amendment. Evidence gathered in violation of your Constitutional rights is subject to the Exclusionary Rule.


Is it proper to submit evidence to the Supreme Court ex parte?

You don't 'submit evidence' to the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court only rules on cases which have already been litigated, and does not hear witnesses or view evidence.


Contemt of court?

Contempt of Court is issued when a person has been hiding evidence from the court that could have helped them to solve the crime or civil case. Their only issued if the person has been asked by the court if they have any evidence for them if the person who has been asked replies no but knows that he has evidence he will be issued a Contempt of Court.


Which amendment applies the courts in the exclusionary rule have held that evidence seized unlawfully with a search warrant cannot be used in a court of law?

The exclusionary rule is grounded in the Fourth Amendment and it is intended to protect citizens from illegal searches and seizures." The exclusionary rule is also designed to provide a remedy and disincentive, which is short of criminal prosecution in response to prosecutors and police who illegally gather evidence in violation of the Fifth Amendment in the Bill of Rights compelled to self-incrimination. The exclusionary rule also applies to violations of the Sixth Amendment, which guarantees the right to counsel.

Related questions

Can a letter opened illegally be used in court as evidence?

No, evidence obtained illegally, including letters that were opened without permission, is generally not admissible in court due to the exclusionary rule, which prohibits the use of illegally obtained evidence in legal proceedings.


The practice of disallowing the admission in court of illegally obtained evidence is known as?

The exclusionary rule.


Can illegally obtained email be used in a criminal case?

The accused has the right to challenge the admissibility of any evidence used against them at trial. Whether an e-mail or any other evidence is "illegally obtained" is subject to the interpretation of the court, not the accused. If the court rules that evidence is obtained unlawfully, it can be suppressed at trial and not considered.


What rationale has the US Supreme Court adopted for excluding illegally obtained evidence from criminal trials?

Mapp v. Ohio


What does the exclusionary rule dictate?

The exclusionary rule dictates that any evidence obtained with an improperly received search warrant or evidence obtained without any search warrant would be held inadmissible in a criminal trial.


Can an ex-girlfriend record her ex-boyfriends conversation without him knowing it and then try to bring it into court three months later to be used as evidence?

Yes, she can record anything she want too. But, she cannot use it in court as evidence when it was obtained unlawfully.


Illegally obtained evidence cannot be used in a court of law this statement is based on a person constitutional right to?

This statement is based on a person's constitutional right to protection against unreasonable search and seizure, as outlined in the Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. It aims to prevent law enforcement from violating individuals' rights by obtaining evidence through unlawful means.


How did the Court's decision in US v. Weeks differ from what had become common law on illegally seized evidence?

In Weeks v. United States, 232 U.S. 383 (1914), the United States Supreme Court unanimously held that the warrantless seizure of items from a private residence constitutes a violation of the Fourth Amendment. It also set forth the exclusionary rule that prohibits admission of illegally obtained evidence in federal courts.See below link:


Why may illegally seized evidence not be used in a trial?

any evidence will be described as illegal if there is proof that it was forcefully obtained,without permission properly investigated .


What happens if any of the rights are abridged in pursuing a conviction?

The general doctrine courts follow is called "fruit of the poison tree." If a defendant's rights were violated, then any evidence deriving either directly or indirectly from that violation is inadmissible in court. The violation "poisons" the evidence obtained illegally and any other evidence discovered as a result. It is not, however, a "get out of jail free" card. If the police illegally search your home without a warrant and find heroin there, they cannot use that as evidence. They can, however, use the surveillance video taken of you two weeks ago showing you selling heroin in the park that made them want to search your home in the first place as evidence.


What are the rules of evidence and proof?

Rules of evidence are a set of rules that determine what can and cannot be admitted in Court. Evidence is how you prove something in court.


What is the main purpose of the exclusionary rule?

The Exclusionary Rule's purpose is to keep certain evidence from being used against you in a criminal trial. Police procedure in gathering evidence against you is heavily dictated by cases interpreting the Fourth Amendment. Evidence gathered in violation of your Constitutional rights is subject to the Exclusionary Rule.