Paralegal Certification PrepLitigationHard

A paralegal is reviewing a police report in a criminal case. The report details an officer's seizure of contraband from a suspect's car after a traffic stop, but it does not mention a warrant or any articulable suspicion for the stop. The defense attorney believes the seizure was illegal. Under which legal doctrine might the evidence be excluded from trial?

  1. APlain view doctrine
  2. BInevitable discovery doctrine
  3. CHarmless error rule
  4. DExclusionary rule
Show answer & explanation

Correct answer: D. Exclusionary rule

The exclusionary rule prevents illegally obtained evidence from being used in a criminal trial. If the stop or seizure was illegal due to lack of a warrant or probable cause, this rule would apply.

Why the other options are wrong

  • A. The plain view doctrine is an exception to the warrant requirement, allowing seizure of evidence if it's in plain view and its incriminating nature is immediately apparent.
  • B. The inevitable discovery doctrine is an exception to the exclusionary rule, allowing evidence if it would have been discovered lawfully anyway.
  • C. The harmless error rule applies when an error occurred, but it was not significant enough to affect the outcome of the trial.

Exclusionary Rule

A legal principle in the United States criminal procedure that prevents evidence collected or analyzed in violation of the defendant's constitutional rights from being used in a court of law.

  • Primary purpose is to deter unlawful police conduct.
  • Applies to evidence obtained in violation of the Fourth, Fifth, and Sixth Amendments.
  • Has several exceptions, such as the 'good faith' and 'inevitable discovery' doctrines.

Memory trick: Bad cops mean bad evidence.

More Litigation questions