|
Based on your IP address, your paper is being delivered by:
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
New York, USA
Processing request.
|
Illinois, USA
Processing request.
|
Brussels, Belgium
Processing request.
|
Seoul, Korea
Processing request.
|
California, USA
Processing request.
|
If you have any problems downloading this paper,
please click on another Download Location above, or
File name: SSRN-id1138796. ; Size: 129K
|
|
Is the Exclusionary Rule Obsolete?
David Alan Sklansky
University of California, Berkeley - School of Law
Ohio State Journal of Criminal Law, Vol. 5, No. 2, 2008
UC Berkeley Public Law Research Paper No. 1138796
Abstract:
This short essay, delivered as the 2007-2008 Blackmun Lecture at Ohio State University, considers the Supreme Court's suggestion in Michigan v. Hudson (2006) that developments in law enforcement since the 1960s have drastically undercut the need for the exclusionary rule. How does that notion square with what we know about the rule world of policing and criminal adjudication? Law enforcement has in fact changed substantially in recent decades, and largely for the better. Those changes may in fact justify significant shifts in how we think about and regulate the police. But simple considerations of scale, tied with anecdotal experience with the selective removal of the exclusionary sanction, cast doubt on the Court's suggestion.
Number of Pages in PDF File: 18
Keywords: police, exclusionary rule, Michigan v. Hudson, Supreme Court
Accepted Paper Series
Download This Paper
Date posted: June 2, 2008
Suggested CitationSklansky, David Alan, Is the Exclusionary Rule Obsolete?. Ohio State Journal of Criminal Law, Vol. 5, No. 2, 2008; UC Berkeley Public Law Research Paper No. 1138796. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1138796
|
| Feedback to SSRN (Beta) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
