Snappy newsletters. Simple Facebook sharing. Spirited comments. Sweet features are waiting… GET THEM NOW!

Supreme Court OKs Use of Illegally Obtained Evidence

5-4 vote along ideological lines aims to avoid criminals freed on mere technicalities

By Kevin Spak,  Newser Staff

Posted Jan 14, 2009 1:23 PM CST
Email

(Newser) – The Supreme Court today ruled that evidence obtained in violation of the Constitution is admissible in court, Bloomberg reports, in a 5-4 vote along ideological lines. The court ruled that prosecutors could try an Alabama man who was found to be carrying methamphetamine and a pistol when he was accidentally arrested in 2004 due to a clerical error.

“In such a case, the criminal should not go free because the constable has blundered,” wrote John Roberts for the majority. In the past, the court upheld up the “exclusionary rule,” barring illegally obtained evidence, but that rule has been curtailed recently. In dissent, Ruth Bader Ginsburg said the exclusionary rule was the only effective way to prevent negligent police from threatening individual freedom.

Members of the Supreme Court pose for a photo at the Supreme Court Building in Washington.
Members of the Supreme Court pose for a photo at the Supreme Court Building in Washington.   (AP Photo)
Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts pauses during a speech in Washington.
Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts pauses during a speech in Washington.   (AP Photo)
The Supreme Court is shown in this 2000 file photo.
The Supreme Court is shown in this 2000 file photo.   (AP Photo)
« Prev« Prev | Next »Next » Slideshow
To report an error on this story, notify our editors.
A snapshot of the day's best news stories.
 
COMMENTS
Showing 3 of 9 comments
riffran
Jan 15, 2009 5:17 AM CST
meth and a pistol, gee I bet he was going to volunteer to help at an orphanage on his way to give clothing to the homeless....put the druggie in a slammer and throw away the key, because he was either using or selling or both...let em rot
Guest
Jan 15, 2009 2:49 AM CST
Somehow, I doubt you understand the precedence this sets for the erosion of our civil liberties, as if though Bush' hadn't been bad enough.
AClotfelter
Jan 15, 2009 12:15 AM CST
I suppose you're right... I'm fairly convinced that it's all an act anyway... someone who loves to get a rise out of people, so they go on all these McCarthy-era tirades against pinkos

Justices OK evidence obtained through errors, false information
Chicago Tribune

Law & Order plot twists will never be the same
Village Voice

 
John Roberts • Ruth Bader Ginsburg • search and seizure • US Supreme Court • evidence

More Newser Stories

Supreme Court Bans Warrantless GPS Tracking

Judge Roberts: All Justices Can Rule on Obamacare

Hey, Lefties: This Supreme Court Should Scare You

Ginsburg Not Leaving Supreme Court 'Anytime Soon'

Supreme Court's New Go-To Tool: the Dictionary
NEWS FROM OUR PARTNERS
Other Sites We Like:   24/7 Wall St.   |   Betty Confidential   |   BuzzFeed   |   Cracked   |   Fark   |   Timelines   |   The Frisky   |   Geek Sugar   |   NewsOne