MBE Rules · Criminal Procedure
Exclusionary Rule Exceptions
Attenuation / independent source / inevitable discovery
The rule
Illegally obtained evidence is nonetheless admissible when the taint is attenuated (time, intervening acts like a valid warrant, flagrancy), the evidence came from a genuinely independent source, or it inevitably would have been discovered lawfully.
In plain English
The Exclusionary Rule generally prevents illegally obtained evidence from being used in court. However, there are exceptions where such evidence can still be admitted if it has been sufficiently disconnected from the illegal action, if it was obtained from an independent source, or if it would have been found through lawful means anyway.
Worked example
Police illegally entered a suspect's home without a warrant and found drugs. Later, they obtained a valid warrant based on a tip that was unrelated to the illegal entry and discovered the same drugs again. The evidence is admissible because it was obtained through a valid warrant, which serves as an independent source.
Memory hook
Evidence can slip through the cracks if it’s found independently or would have been discovered anyway.
The trap
Exams may present scenarios where students must determine if the connection between the illegal act and the evidence is sufficiently attenuated, leading to confusion about what constitutes 'sufficiently disconnected.'
How examiners test it
Questions often involve a fact pattern where evidence is obtained through illegal means, followed by a subsequent lawful action, testing the candidate's understanding of the exceptions to the Exclusionary Rule.
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.