skip navigation


Register for Latest Research

Stay Informed
Register with NCJRS to receive NCJRS's biweekly e-newsletter JUSTINFO and additional periodic emails from NCJRS and the NCJRS federal sponsors that highlight the latest research published or sponsored by the Office of Justice Programs.

NCJRS Abstract

The document referenced below is part of the NCJRS Virtual Library collection. To conduct further searches of the collection, visit the Virtual Library. See the Obtain Documents page for direction on how to access resources online, via mail, through interlibrary loans, or in a local library.


NCJ Number: 97588 Add to Shopping cart Find in a Library
Title: United States Supreme Court Modifies the Exclusionary Rule United States v Leon and Massachusetts v Sheppard
Author(s): R L Farb
Corporate Author: University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill School of Government
United States of America
Date Published: 1984
Page Count: 5
Sponsoring Agency: National Institute of Justice/
Rockville, MD 20849
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill School of Government
Chapel Hill, NC 27599-5381
Sale Source: National Institute of Justice/
NCJRS paper reproduction
Box 6000, Dept F
Rockville, MD 20849
United States of America
Language: English
Country: United States of America
Annotation: Two U.S. Supreme Court decisions modifying the exclusionary rule so it does not apply when a search warrant is later determined to be invalid is explained in terms of its background, general implications, and application in North Carolina.
Abstract: In the United States v. Leon case, an informant of unproven reliability told a police officer about drug sales from a residence. The case of Massachusetts v. Sheppard involved evidence collected in a homicide investigation. In both cases, the circuit court of appeals or State supreme court upheld the suppression of the evidence due to problems with the warrants. In overturning these decisions, the U.S. Supreme Court held that the exclusionary rule does not apply when a law enforcement officer conducts a search in objectively reasonable reliance on a search warrant issued by a detached and neutral magistrate, although it is later determined to be invalid. The Court noted that issuance of a warrant by a magistrate or judge would normally suffice to establish that the officer acted in objectively reasonable reliance upon a search warrant. It also noted that it will sometimes be clear that the officer could not have believed that the search warrant was properly issued. The Court may well extend the modification of the exclusionary rule to warrantless searches and seizures. The Leon and Sheppard rulings apply fully in North Carolina. Judges conducting suppression hearings need not hear evidence or make findings of fact concerning a particular officer's training or knowledge of the fourth amendment. Also, the Leon and Sheppard modifications need not be considered if another exception to the exclusionary rule applies. A total of 21 footnotes are supplied.
Index Term(s): North Carolina; Search warrants; US Supreme Court decisions
Note: Administration of Justice Memorandum, N 84/02 (August 1984).
To cite this abstract, use the following link:

*A link to the full-text document is provided whenever possible. For documents not available online, a link to the publisher's website is provided. Tell us how you use the NCJRS Library and Abstracts Database - send us your feedback.