Search

The article focuses on working knowledge of the exclusionary rule and Fourth Amendment law generally. It mentions courts' consideration of the question of exclusion of unconstitutionally seized evidence at sentencing and imposition of mandatory Federal Sentencing Guidelines, some courts found reason to exclude illegally obtained evidence at sentencing. It also mentions difference between an increase in sentence and conviction is merely semantic and evidence on plea-bargaining.

The good faith exception to the exclusionary rule, as set out by the Supreme Court in United States v. Leon, is well established when the government relies on a traditional search warrant. Its applicability to the government's reliance on wiretap orders issued under Title III, the federal wiretap law, remains an open question, however. While there is a circuit split on the issue, commentators have uniformly opposed application of the good faith exception in Title III cases. By contrast, this Article makes a comprehensive case for a good faith exception for the government's reasonable reliance on Title III wiretap orders. First, this Article briefly outlines Title Ill's suppression remedy, the law related to the exclusionary rule outside the wiretap context, and the circuit split over application of the good faith exception in Title III wiretap cases. Next, this Article analyzes the current divide in the courts and considers the arguments of commentators opposed to a good faith exception in wiretap cases. It concludes that the text and legislative history of Title III support application of the good faith exception but acknowledges that outcome is not clear under the current version of the statute. Thus, this Article concludes by examining the normative and practical implications of a good faith amendment to Title III. It argues that the good faith exception is more applicable to reliance on wiretap orders than reliance on traditional search warrants, in part due to the more detailed requirements for the government to obtain authorization for electronic surveillance. It also ad-dresses specific concerns raised by courts and commentators and explains why inclusion of a good faith amendment in Title III will not lead to increased government wiretapping or an erosion of Title Ill's suppression remedy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Discusses the inevitability and desirability of the mens rea requirement in criminal law. Human constructs that give meaning and value to human lives; Error of the causation argument as an explanation of present responsibility concepts and practices; Kinds of evidence.