Informers when it comes to informants consensual

This preview shows page 20 - 22 out of 41 pages.

Informers When it comes to informants, consensual participant monitoring is constitutional—this means that somebody who is a party to the conversation must consent. Hoffa v. U.S. Secret Agents and the 4 th amendment Facts: government informer made numerous reports about conversations between criminals Holding: Not a violation of 4 th amendment Reasoning: ∆ had misplaced confidence that person he voluntarily confided in would not reveal U.S. v. White - undercover use of recording device does is not a 4 th amendment search The Supervisory Power of the Courts US v. Payner: court supervisory powers do not permit the court to exclude evidence at the request of a party who was not the victim of the challenged practice The Exclusionary Rule Exclusionary rule — the doctrine through which evidence acquired in violation of the Cx is usually subject to exclusion o Purpose of the exclusionary rule is to deter police violations of the 4 th amendment Even if 4 th amendment is violated, do officers have an argument that evidence should not be suppressed bc no standing or exception to exclusionary rule Weeks –exclusionary rule applies in federal court Wolf v. Colorado - ( overruled) exclusionary rule does not apply to states Policy: o Deterrence : DETERS POLICE MISCONDUCT. It removes incentive to violate the 4 th Am; deters future unlawful police conduct and incentivizes getting a warrant o Fairness : police should not be in a better investigative position as a result of 4 th amend violation o Useless : w/o the exclusionary rule, the effect of the 4 th amendment is lost in practice o Necessity : Alternative remedies are not effective in protecting 4 th Am. rights. o Judicial Integrity : Court’s should not be accepting “tainted” evidence at trial. For application of exclusion under Mapp: o 1. A violation of the 4 th amendment must have occurred o 2. No exception to the exclusionary rule is present Good faith ( Leon ) Grand jury questioning ( Calandra) , parole revocation hearings etc. Court clerical error (Evans) Knock and announce exception ( Hudson ) One way to argue that you can use the evidence is under Gates saying there is no violation of the 4 th amendment bc magistrate has substantial basis. If not then say exception to exclusionary rule in the good faith exception of Leon. o Brennan says we cant make both of these arguments Abolish ER? o Yes maybe it will over-deter. Only the guilty suffer bc they are culpable. Maybe administrative punishment of police is better deterrent than guilty walking free o No if we don’t exclude, what is the point of the 4 th amendment. *Note: 4 th amendment does not apply to private people. Typical cost/benefits: 20
o Costs: flood litigation; concerned PO will be over-deterred; suppression of evidence amounts to a get-out of jail-free card o Benefits: civil alternatives; Mapp v. Ohio Exclusionary rule Facts: Police went to house to look for bombing suspect with what purported to be a search warrant,

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture