You are an investigator with the District Attorney’s

You are an investigator with the District Attorney’s Investigation Team for a major metropolitan area. You are one of the recently hired 16 new investigators that will be sprinkled throughout the department. All 16 of you have had little time as investigators and the Chief’s concern is that you all are properly trained in issues of the exclusionary rule to avoid problems later on during investigations. This is a political hot potato because these are supposed to be the best investigators in the jurisdiction. You have already provided an extensive paper to your new fellow investigators and noticed an interest they had in exceptions to the Exclusionary Rule.

You have decided to provide an addendum to last week’s training to address some of the exceptions. In a paper, include responses to the bulleted issues listed below.

Detail the concept for admissibility of plain sight evidence and the legal requirements for the investigator to invoke a plain sight seizure. Explain how evidence that would have been found without the questionable search that violates the exclusionary rule could ultimately be admissible as evidence. Relate how the court views investigators and realizes that human error will sometimes result in faulty paperwork.

Explain how the court allows for such errors in the “Good Faith” principle. The student will select two of the three concepts known as dying declaration, the silver platter rule, and exigent circumstance.