Ohio State Journal of Criminal Law
exclusionary rule, Fourth Amendment, Mapp v. Ohio
Criminal Law | Fourth Amendment | Law
This symposium, comprising six articles in addition to this one, was triggered by a spate of Supreme Court opinions occurring over the last seven years, all of which raise the two questions in the title to this article (which is also the title of the symposium). Since 1974, when United States v. Calandra definitively established deterrence as the primary objective of the suppression remedy, the Court has nibbled away at the exclusionary rule from a number of different directions. But the Court's decisions in Hudson v. Michigan (2006), Herring v. United States (2009), and Davis v. United States (2011) reveal a Court that is now willing to take much larger bites out of the rule, and perhaps even swallow it whole.
The Exclusionary Rule: Is It on Its Way Out? Should It Be?, 10 Ohio State Journal of Criminal Law. 341
Available at: https://scholarship.law.vanderbilt.edu/faculty-publications/283