Transaction Search Form: please type in any of the fields below.
Date: April 29, 2024 Mon
Time: 9:28 pm
Time: 9:28 pm
Results for exclusionary rule
2 results foundAuthor: Dharmapala, Dhammika Title: Do Exclusionary Rules Convict the Innocent? Summary: Rules excluding various kinds of evidence from criminal trials play a prominent role in criminal procedure, and have generated considerable controversy. In this paper, we address the general topic of excluding factually relevant evidence, that is, the kind of evidence that would rationally influence the jury’s verdict if it were admitted. We do not offer a comprehensive analysis of these exclusionary rules, but add to the existing literature by identifying a new domain for economic analysis, focusing on how juries respond to the existence of such a rule. We show that the impact of exclusionary rules on the likelihood of conviction is complex and depends on the degree of rationality exhibited by juries and on the motivations of the prosecutor. Details: Chicago: Law School, University of Chicago, 2011. 19p. Source: Internet Resource: U of Chicago Law & Economics, Olin Working Paper No. 569 Illinois Program in Law, Behavior and Social Science Paper No. LBSS11-30, Accessed November 1, 2011 at: http://www.law.uchicago.edu/files/file/569-rma-innocent.pdf Year: 2011 Country: United States URL: http://www.law.uchicago.edu/files/file/569-rma-innocent.pdf Shelf Number: 123210 Keywords: Criminal TrialsEvidenceExclusionary RuleInnocenceJuries |
Author: Slogogin, Christopher Title: A Comparative Perspective on the Exclusionary Rule in Search and Seizure Cases Summary: The modern United States Supreme Court views the exclusionary rule as a means of deterring police conduct that unduly infringes privacy or autonomy interests. But in years past the Court also proffered two other reasons for exclusion: the importance of ensuring the integrity of the legal system (primarily by avoiding judicial complicity with police illegality) and the need to vindicate constitutional guarantees. Some version of one or both of the latter two rationales also appears to be the primary motivation behind the exclusionary rules in other countries. In contrast to the United States, however, in most of these countries exclusion is not very common. Those countries that focus on systemic integrity take into account not only the de-legitimizing impact of failing to exclude illegally seized evidence but also the truth-denigrating effect of excluding evidence. Those countries that focus on vindicating fundamental rights tend to define those rights narrowly, or undercut the vindication rationale in various other ways. After describing these developments, this paper examines, from both empirical and theoretical perspectives, the difficulties that arise in applying the deterrence, systemic integrity,and rights vindication models of the rule and concludes with thoughts about the possible alternatives to exclusion, the ways in which the exclusionary remedy can be refined, and the interaction of the exclusionary rule with substantive search and seizure law. Details: Nashville, TC: Vanderbilt University Law School, 2013. 25p. Source: Internet Resource: Vanderbilt University Law School Public Law & Legal Theory Working Paper Number 13-21: Accessed May 9, 2013 at: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2247746 Year: 2013 Country: International URL: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2247746 Shelf Number: 128688 Keywords: Criminal LawExclusionary RulePolice MisconductSearch and Seizure |