Abstract: Publisher Summary
Although the traditional common law doctrine is that evidence is admissible if relevant even though obtained illegally, much evidence is not admissible if a federal or state constitutional provision has been violated. Exclusionary rules have developed over time and have been made applicable both to federal and state courts on a piecemeal basis. Under the present rules, most evidence obtained by search and seizure in violation of the Constitution is inadmissible in both federal and state courts. The cases must be examined thoroughly to determine what is considered an illegal search and under what circumstances the exclusionary rules apply. As a means of ensuring that confessions will be obtained freely and voluntarily, courts have established rules that prohibit the admissibility of confessions obtained in violation of established standards. Although evidence continues to be challenged with arguments that the admission of physical facts or scientific evidence results in a violation of the Fifth Amendment self incrimination privilege, this protection has been interpreted to apply only to evidence of a testimonial or a communicative nature. Evidence that is of a testimonial or communicative nature is inadmissible unless this protection is waived.
Publication Year: 2009
Publication Date: 2009-01-01
Language: en
Type: article
Access and Citation
AI Researcher Chatbot
Get quick answers to your questions about the article from our AI researcher chatbot