One of the implications of the exclusionary rule is that it:Group of answer choicesit forces officers to gather evidence properlyIt is unlikely for a conviction if the officer follows appropriate proceduresallows the rights of the accused to be overlookedit explains the differences between probable cause and reasonable suspicion
Question
One of the implications of the exclusionary rule is that it:Group of answer choicesit forces officers to gather evidence properlyIt is unlikely for a conviction if the officer follows appropriate proceduresallows the rights of the accused to be overlookedit explains the differences between probable cause and reasonable suspicion
Solution
The exclusionary rule primarily forces officers to gather evidence properly. This rule is a legal principle in the United States, under constitutional law, which holds that evidence collected or analyzed in violation of the defendant's constitutional rights is sometimes inadmissible for a criminal prosecution in a court of law. Therefore, it does not allow the rights of the accused to be overlooked. It also does not explain the differences between probable cause and reasonable suspicion, as these are separate legal concepts. Lastly, while it is true that a conviction is more likely if the officer follows appropriate procedures, this is more of a general truth about legal proceedings rather than a specific implication of the exclusionary rule.
Similar Questions
The exclusionary rule is a rule of criminal procedure stating that evidence obtained illegally cannot be used at trial.Group of answer choicesTrueFalse
An exception(s) to the Exclusionary Rule is/are:Group of answer choicesProsecution can use evidence seized by police who acted pursuant to a warrant that later was found to be invalid but police reasonably believed the warrant was valid (good faith) AND illegally obtained evidence may be introduced at trial if the prosecutor can show the evidence would have been inevitably obtained in a legal mannerProsecution can use evidence seized by police who acted pursuant to a warrant that later was found to be invalid but police reasonably believed the warrant was valid (good faith)The defendant has committed many similar crimes and the current crime is the same type of crime so evidence can be used at trialIllegally obtained evidence may be introduced at trial if the prosecutor can show the evidence would have been inevitably obtained in a legal manner
Under what circumstances can the Good Faith exception be applied to the Exclusionary Rule?*A. When the police officer acted in bad faith.B. When the evidence was obtained through an illegal search.C. When the police officer believed their actions were legal.D. When the evidence is crucial to the case.
The exclusionary rule states thatGroup of answer choicesstate law cannot be applied in federal courts.evidence obtained illegally is inadmissible in court.federal law cannot be applied in state courts.the laws of one state court cannot be applied in the courts of another state.none of the above.
If the future of law enforcement increasingly reflects the principles and policies of the crime control model, then you might expect:Group of answer choicesa greater emphasis on probable cause in detaining suspects.fewer limitations on how the police attempt to combat crime.all of the above.efficient decreases in the length of time a suspect may be detained before being charged.
Upgrade your grade with Knowee
Get personalized homework help. Review tough concepts in more detail, or go deeper into your topic by exploring other relevant questions.