WaPo: Future of the exclusionary rule? Preview of Utah v. Strieff

WaPo: Preview of Utah v. Strieff by Orin Kerr:

SCOTUSblog has posted a preview I authored about Utah v. Strieff, a Fourth Amendment case on the scope of the exclusionary rule. Here’s the introduction:

Formally speaking, Utah v. Strieff considers the scope of the Fourth Amendment’s exclusionary rule when an illegal stop leads to the discovery of public information that justifies an arrest. More specifically, here’s the doctrinal question presented: Does the exclusionary rule apply when an officer learns during an illegal Terry stop that that there is a warrant for the suspect’s arrest, he arrests the suspect on the warrant, and he finds incriminating evidence during the search incident to arrest?

As a practical matter, that’s a pretty important question. But this case is also about a big conceptual question: What is the future of the exclusionary rule? This is the Court’s first exclusionary rule case since Davis v. United States in 2011. Davis left the state of the law quite uncertain, giving this case the potential to be a major decision. The Court may stick to its traditional doctrine on the exclusionary rule, in which case Edward Strieff has a strong argument that he should prevail. On the other hand, the Court may use this case to further chip away at the exclusionary rule. If so, all bets are off.

This entry was posted in Exclusionary rule, SCOTUS. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.