The foundation of these limits is the need to protect the privacy of the individual and control police behaviors. Conclusion:

In the three cases, the application of the provisions of the Fourth Amendment could have been helpful in ensuring that the officers conducted their searches more efficiently. In Weeks vs. U.S. And Mapp vs. Ohio, they could have avoided using forceful and illegal means to obtain evidence. Similar to these two cases, they could have conducted more efficient search and seizure in Rochin vs. California by respecting the person's privacy and avoiding use of force.

References:

Dempsey, J.S. & Forst, L.S. (2011). Police and the law. In Police (1st ed., pp. 179-193). Delmar,

Ohio: Cengage Learning.

"Evaluation of...

Essortment -- Your Source for Knowledge.
Retrieved June 5, 2012, from http://www.essortment.com/evaluation-exclusionary-rule-50665.html

"The Exclusionary Rule." (n.d.). Cliff's Notes. Retrieved June 5, 2012, from http://www.cliffsnotes.com/study_guide/the-Exclusionary-Rule.topicArticleId-10065,articleId-9964.html

"Understanding Search and Seizure Law." (n.d.). Nolo Law for All. Retrieved June 5, 2012,

from http://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/search-seizure-criminal-law-30183.html

Woodfin, K.R. (2009, November 30). The Exclusionary Rule. Retrieved June 5, 2012, from http://www.woodfin.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=98:the-exclusionary-rule&catid=36:criminal-justice&Itemid=54