Brief filed: 01/29/2016
Utah v. Strieff
United States Supreme Court; Case No. 14-1373
Decision below State v. Strieff, 357 P.3d 532 (Utah Jan. 16, 2015).
The evidence was correctly excluded for reasons that are distinct from, but related to, deterrence. The exclusionary rule serves purposes other than deterrence alone. Judicial integrity is an important factor in the balance of benefits and burdens. Restoration of the status quo ante is likewise an important consideration. The rule's alternative rationales help explain why suppression would deter violations like the one in this case. The social costs of suppression do not outweigh the considerations favoring it.
This is a sponsored ad
Manage Your Law Firm All in One Place
Michael B. Kimberly and Matthew A. Waring, Mayer Brown LLP, Washington, DC; Steven R. Shapiro, ACLU Foundation, New York, NY; Jeffrey T. Green, NACDL, Washington, DC.