NCJ Number
137220
Journal
Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology Volume: 82 Issue: 4 Dated: (Winter 1992) Pages: 747-772
Date Published
1992
Length
26 pages
Annotation
In California v. Hodari D., the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that police pursuit of a fleeing suspect, no matter how dangerous the pursuit, does not constitute an unreasonable seizure as defined by the fourth amendment.
Abstract
Therefore, evidence discarded by the suspect during the pursuit and collected by police does not fall under the exclusionary rule which prohibits the fruits of an unreasonable search or seizure from being presented as evidence in a criminal case. The exclusionary rule has also been previously applied to evidence obtained indirectly or derivatively from illegal searches. In its ruling, the Supreme Court stated that harassing police conduct, such as a pursuit, which does not immediately result in a stop, but which prompts the suspect to reveal evidence that would otherwise be impermissible for police to seek by means of a personal search, is not unconstitutional. In deciding whether a search is reasonable, the court must examine both the harassing police behavior as well as the suspect's initial reaction. If the suspect does not immediately surrender to police, the police are allowed to institute a series of procedures designed to control the suspect's reaction while encouraging his self-incrimination. In Hodari D., the Supreme Court gave police leeway to stray from the "legitimate investigative sphere," thus calling into question the validity of the exclusionary rule as a means of deterring police improprieties. 216 notes