What does the exclusionary rule state about evidence obtained in violation of the Constitution?

What does the exclusionary rule state about evidence obtained in violation of the Constitution?

• A. Double jeopardy cannot occur.
• B. Defendants who have had their rights violated can plea bargain.
• C. Police officers must be disciplined.
• D. Evidence gathered in violation of the Constitution cannot be used in a trial.

Answer: (D)

The essential idea is about whether evidence can be used in court. The exclusionary rule says that evidence obtained in violation of the Constitution cannot be admitted at trial, to protect constitutional rights and deter unlawful police conduct. In practice, a judge suppresses that evidence, including both the physical items and any testimony that flowed from the illegal action (the fruit of the poisonous tree). There are exceptions in some cases (for example, good-faith reliance on a defective warrant, or evidence discovered independently of the illegal search), but the basic rule is that unlawfully obtained evidence isn’t admissible. The other options concern different legal principles (double jeopardy, plea bargaining, or police discipline) that don’t address admissibility of evidence.

The essential idea is about whether evidence can be used in court. The exclusionary rule says that evidence obtained in violation of the Constitution cannot be admitted at trial, to protect constitutional rights and deter unlawful police conduct. In practice, a judge suppresses that evidence, including both the physical items and any testimony that flowed from the illegal action (the fruit of the poisonous tree). There are exceptions in some cases (for example, good-faith reliance on a defective warrant, or evidence discovered independently of the illegal search), but the basic rule is that unlawfully obtained evidence isn’t admissible. The other options concern different legal principles (double jeopardy, plea bargaining, or police discipline) that don’t address admissibility of evidence.