The Court decided that technical violations of proper warrant execution in "good faith" of the nature described in Hudson would not trigger the exclusionary rule (Schott, 2006).. Ultimately, as constitutional criminal procedure developed since Mapp, a balance arose between the need to safeguard the constitutional rights of the accused with the need to preserve the admissibility of evidence when violations associated with its procurement do not rise to the level necessitating its exclusion. More than any other factor, this balance also allowed police the appropriate freedom to perform their assigned function of preventing crime, apprehending criminal suspects, and collecting evidence without having to compromise their ethics and violate their sworn oaths to do so effectively.

References

Cloud, M. (1994) Emory Law Journal, the Dirty Little Secret. Accessed...

(2000) U.S. Department of Justice, Police Perjury: A Factorial Survey. Accessed, September 15, 2007, at http://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/181241.pdf
Hendrie, E. (1997) FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin, the Inevitable Discovery Exception to the Exclusionary Rule. Accessed September 15, 2007, at http://www.fbi.gov/publications/leb/1997/sept697.htm

Raymond, M. (1998) St. John's Law Review; Police Policing Police: Some Doubts.

Accessed September 15, 2007, at http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3735/is_199807/ai_n8806451/pg_1

Schott, R. (2006) FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin, Knock and Announce Violations: No 'Cause' to Suppress. Accessed September 15, 2007, at http://www.fbi.gov/publications/leb/2006/sept2006/sept2006leb.htm