What do you think the punishment should be for a law enforcement officer that violates the exclusionary rule?

Question

What do you think the punishment should be for a law enforcement officer that violates the exclusionary rule?

Answer 1

Well, if a LEO violates the exclusionary rule, then first of all, the criminal case is dismissed.  Usually afterwords, the once would be suspect will tend to file a 1983 tort on the officer and department.  However, it also depends on circumstances, seeing as the officer may have been acting in good faith or something else...

Simply, without specific facts, we can't tell you what would happen.  

I for one think that a fine or lawsuit is punishment enough if it ever comes to that point.

Answer 2

law enforcement officers don't violate the exclusionary rule.  The exclusionary rule is a legal process that discounts evidence collected by law enforcement in violation of someone's constitutional rights.  Is your question whether or not law enforcement officers should be punished for violating a person's constitutional rights?  Trust me, if they were not acting in good faith, they can be sued in civil court, possibly prosecuted criminally as well, and most likely will have action taken against them by their department depending on the circumstances.

Answer 3

The punishment is already in place you forfeit your case.

See the following cases for the history of exclusionary:

Wolf v Colorado 338 US 25 (1949)

Mapp v Ohio 367 US 643 (1961)

United States v Leon 468 US 897 (1984)

California v Greenwood 486 US 35 (1988)

Florida v Riley 488 US 445 ( 1989)

Answer 4

Tough to say.  I want crimes against people and property punished appropriately, and that isn't happening under the current legal system.  Maybe we need to taste the fruit of the poisonous tree occasionally...??