MBE Rules · Criminal Procedure
Good faith exception
Leon
The rule
Evidence obtained by officers in objectively reasonable reliance on a facially valid warrant later found defective is admissible. Exception does not apply if (1) magistrate misled by knowingly false affidavit, (2) magistrate abandoned neutral role, (3) affidavit so lacking in PC that reliance was unreasonable, OR (4) warrant facially deficient.
In plain English
If police act on a warrant they believe is valid, but it turns out to be flawed, the evidence might still be used in court unless the warrant was obviously bad or obtained dishonestly.
Worked example
Officer A searches a house based on a warrant that later turns out to have a typo in the address. Since the officer reasonably thought the warrant was valid, the evidence found can still be used in court.
Memory hook
Good Faith Grace: Warrant Wrong, Evidence Strong. If cops rely on a valid-looking warrant, evidence stays unless deceit or glaring errors exist.
The trap
Students think: Any defective warrant leads to exclusion. Wrong, because good faith reliance can save evidence unless the warrant is obviously flawed or deceitful. The actual test is objective reasonableness of reliance.
How examiners test it
The MBE loves: warrant later deemed invalid, but officer followed procedure. Trap: students assume automatic exclusion. Key: was reliance on the warrant objectively reasonable? Focus on exceptions like false affidavits or magistrate bias.
Drill this rule until it can't fail you.
Vrenberg generates unlimited questions on this exact rule, tracks your mastery of it, and brings it back until it sticks.