is the exclusion of evidence that is obtained through an improper search the appropriate response to an improper search or is there a better way to deal with such situation
I believe it's the appropriate response.
are there any websites available that will provide information that can back this up?
http://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/search-seizure-criminal-law-30183.html
http://writ.news.findlaw.com/colb/20091125.html
http://nationalparalegal.edu/conlawcrimproc_public/ProtectionFromSearches&Seizures/ExclusionaryRule.asp
thank you very much for the help
You're very welcome.
The exclusion of evidence obtained through an improper search is one way to deal with the situation, but it is not the only approach. The exclusionary rule is a legal principle that aims to deter and punish law enforcement misconduct by suppressing evidence that was obtained in violation of a person's constitutional rights.
However, there are alternative approaches that can be used to address the issue of evidence obtained through an improper search. Some of these alternatives include:
1. Judicial Remedies: Instead of excluding the evidence, the court can choose to provide a remedy that does not involve exclusion. This may include ordering the police to return the illegally seized evidence, issuing an injunction to prevent its use at trial, or imposing sanctions on law enforcement officers involved in the misconduct.
2. Civil Liability: The person whose rights were violated can bring a civil lawsuit against the officers involved in the improper search. If successful, they may be awarded damages as a form of compensation for the violation, and this can serve as a deterrent for future misconduct.
3. Internal Police Discipline: Law enforcement agencies can internally investigate and discipline officers who engage in improper searches. This can involve disciplinary actions such as reprimand, suspension, or termination, depending on the severity of the misconduct. This approach focuses on holding individual officers accountable for their actions.
4. Training and Education: Invest in comprehensive training programs for law enforcement officers, focusing on constitutional rights, search and seizure protocols, and proper investigative techniques. By providing officers with the necessary knowledge and skills, the likelihood of improper searches can be reduced.
It's important to note that the appropriateness of each response may depend on various factors, including the nature and severity of the constitutional violation, the potential impact on the fairness of the trial, and the need to deter future misconduct. Courts have the discretion to determine which approach to apply based on the specific circumstances of each case.