NCJ Number
80853
Journal
Georgetown Law Journal Volume: 70 Issue: 2 Dated: (October 1981) Pages: 365-463
Date Published
1981
Length
99 pages
Annotation
In this article, Professor Wasserstrom and Mr. Mertens examine the exclusionary rule as a deterrent, and suggest that through a variety of methods the rule sufficiently discourages police misconduct to justify its retention. In addition, they use the Williams decision to illustrate the theoretical limitations of the good faith exception, and to demonstrate the problems it will cause in practice. They conclude that the exception will both dilute substantive fourth amendment standards and impede the development of fourth amendment law. Finally, the authors suggest that the current attack on the exclusionary rule may actually mask its critics' dissatisfaction with requirements of the fourth amendment itself.
Abstract
For many years, courts and commentators have criticized the fourth amendment exclusionary rule as being both a device for 'freeing the guilty,' and an ineffective deterrent of illegal police conduct. Recently this criticism has assumed a more tangible form; in United States v. Williams, an en banc majority of the Fifth Circuit endorsed a 'good faith' exception to the rule. (Publisher abstract)