{"id":3546,"date":"2009-11-19T19:22:04","date_gmt":"2009-11-19T19:22:04","guid":{"rendered":""},"modified":"-0001-11-30T00:00:00","modified_gmt":"2009-11-19T19:22:04","slug":"en-US","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/?p=3546","title":{"rendered":"SCOTUSBlog&#8211;Petition to watch on exclusionary rule"},"content":{"rendered":"<p><a href=\"http:\/\/www.scotusblog.com\/wp\/petitions-to-watch-conference-of-11-24-09\/\">SCOTUSBlog petitions to watch 11-24-09 conference<\/a><\/p>\n<p>A potential exclusionary rule case, dressed in RS&#8217;s clothing:<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>\nDocket: 09-102<br \/>\nTitle: Virginia v. Rudolph<br \/>\nIssue: Did the Supreme Court of Virginia properly find, on the facts of this case, that an investigative stop was unjustified under the Fourth Amendment?<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"http:\/\/www.courts.state.va.us\/opinions\/opnscvwp\/1080794.pdf\">Opinion below<\/a> (Virginia Supreme Court)<br \/>\n<a href=\"http:\/\/www.scotusblog.com\/wp\/wp-content\/uploads\/2009\/11\/08-1191_pet.pdf\">Petition for certiorari<\/a><br \/>\n<a href=\"http:\/\/www.scotusblog.com\/wp\/wp-content\/uploads\/2009\/11\/09-102-Rudolph-BIO.pdf\">Brief in opposition<\/a><br \/>\nPetitioner\u2019s reply<br \/>\nAmicus Brief of the Virginia Assoc. of Commonwealth\u2019s Attorneys, et al. <\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>From the state court opinion, after finding no reasonable suspicion:<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>When applied to evidence recovered pursuant to an investigatory stop, the exclusionary rule is best equipped to deter stops made not because of legitimate suspicion, but because the stop was motivated by some pernicious reason (such as racial profiling, personal animus, or the like), or by arbitrariness evidencing a genuine abuse of police power. Such a wrongful basis for the stop warrants the application of the exclusionary rule\u2019s severe penalty.<\/p>\n<p>But not all investigatory stops arise from such base motivations. Indeed, the Supreme Court has explicitly recognized that conduct observed by police may be &#8220;ambiguous and susceptible of an innocent explanation&#8221; and yet still justify an investigatory stop, allowing the officers to &#8220;detain the individuals to resolve the ambiguity.&#8221; &#8230;<\/p><\/blockquote>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>b2evALnk.b2WPAutP <a class=\"more-link\" href=\"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/?p=3546\">Continue reading <span class=\"meta-nav\">&rarr;<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"pingsdone","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-3546","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3546","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=3546"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3546\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=3546"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=3546"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=3546"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}