Exclusionary Rule Under the Fourth

Exclusionary rule under the Fourth Amendment of the United States Constitution concerns the use of evidence against a defendant. In the past, those who originated the Fourth Amendment did not consider police misconduct as a form of government trespass; instead, it was regarded as only a personal trespass and therefore subject to a civil lawsuit.

The change of the role of police officers in criminal law during the 19th century; providing them with the authority to arrest and search, resulted in the increasing misconduct of police officers under their new rights. This made the original understanding of officer misconduct increasingly realistic. The exclusionary rule was therefore created in Weeks v. United States (1914), where the Supreme Court found that a warrantless search of a residence to find illegal lottery tickets could not be regarded as constitutional.

The evidence could therefore not be used as evidence in Weeks's trial. The exclusionary rule also had the important function of limiting governmental power and protecting citizens' right to a fair trial and the assumption of innocence until proven guilty in front of a jury. The Court's decision in Boyd v. United States (1886) illustrates this. The principle was that, using evidence that was found in an unconstitutional manner in court also violated the constitutional rights of the defendant, in addition to conducting an illegal search of the person's property.

The only limitation here was that the defendant could not challenge the constitutionality of searching another person's home, even in cases when uncovered evidence can be used against the defendant. In Texas, where the highest Texas court for criminal matters is the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, The case of Wilson v. State involved the Texas statutory exclusionary rule and the Texas penal code.

The exclusionary rule was first enacted in 1925, and provided that "no evidence obtained by an officer or other person" could be admitted as evidence against the accused if this was held in violation to the provisions of the Constitution or laws of the State of Texas or the Constitution or laws of the United Stats of America. An exception to this is a search conducted by officer acting in objective "good faith" and wit the inclusion of a warrant obtained on the basis of probable cause.

A further provision holds that, if a jury has reasonable reason to believe that the evidence was obtained in violation of the Article, it should disregard the evidence obtained. The Texas Penal Code works in tandem with the exclusionary rule, in that it concerns the falsification of evidence; the false presentation of records or documents in an attempt to affect the outcome of the investigation is an offence, unless such a document is privileged or the work product of parties to the investigation.

It therefore appears that the Texas rule provides a broader basis of protection for its citizens, rather than the single dimension of police searches as provided by the U.S. Constitution. Indeed, the implication is that no person is allowed to search a premises without a warrant and that no evidence obtained by any form of unconstitutional search can.