NCJ Number
37649
Journal
Baylor Law Review Volume: 28 Issue: 3 Dated: (SUMMER 1976) Pages: 611-631
Date Published
1976
Length
21 pages
Annotation
REVIEW OF THE SUPREME COURT DECISIONS IN STONE V POWELL (1976) AND US V JANIS (1976) AND THEIR IMPLICATIONS FOR CONVICTED CRIMINALS SEEKING TO USE THE EXCLUSIONARY RULE TO OVERTURN CONVICTIONS ON FEDERAL HABEAS CORPUS REVIEW.
Abstract
IN STONE, THE COURT HELD THAT THE PRINCIPAL PURPOSE OF THE EXCLUSIONARY RULE WAS DETERRENCE OF UNLAWFUL POLICE CONDUCT AND THAT THE VALUE OF THIS DETERRENCE WAS OUTWEIGHED BY THE COSTS TO SOCIETY OF FREEING THE GUILTY AND DEFLECTING THE TRUTHFINDING FUNCTION. IN JANIS, THE COURT RULED THAT THE EXCLUSIONARY RULE SHOULD NOT BE EXTENDED TO FORBID THE USE OF EVIDENCE ILLEGALLY SEIZED BY ONE SOVEREIGN IN THE CIVIL PROCEEDING OF ANOTHER SOVEREIGN. THE AUTHOR EXAMINES CASE LAW DEVELOPING THE BALANCING TEST OF UNLAWFUL POLICE CONDUCT AGAINST THE COSTS TO SOCIETY OF EXCLUDING RELIABLE AND RELEVANT EVIDENCE. THE FUTURE OF THE EXCLUSIONARY RULE IS ALSO DISCUSSED. THE AUTHOR CONCLUDES THAT, IN LIGHT OF BURGER COURT RULINGS ON THE USE OF THE EXCLUSIONARY RULE, FUTURE CASES WILL REQUIRE THIS BALANCING OF INTERESTS IN STATE COURTS AS WELL.