Citation
United States v. Leon, 468 U.S. 897 (1984)
Facts
The case which made headlines in 1984 involved Alberto Leon, and others who were facing charges of being involved in drug were trafficking. The Burbank police had received a tip that Armando Sanchez, Ricardo Del Castillo, Patsy Stewart and Alberto Leon were drug dealers. The police keen on confirming the rumors obtained a search warrant to search the suspects’ residences and vehicles. However, the court felt that the police forwent the exclusionary rule provided for in the Fourth Amendment, which aims at protecting individuals’ privacy. Moreover, the jury felt that the judge who issued the search warrant may have given a warrant that did not meet the probable cause threshold. Nonetheless, the court went ahead to accept the evidence gotten from the search warrant since the police acted in good faith making this case a landmark case.
Issue
Should the Fourth Amendment exclusionary statute be applied where evidence is gathered in judicious, good faith based on a search warrant?
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Holding
The presiding jury at the Supreme Court reached and announced its decision on July 5, 1984, where Justice Byron White filed for the 6–3 majority in favor of the United States. Justice O’Connor, Justice Rehnquist, Justice Powell, and Justice Burger joined Justice Byron. Justice Harry Blackmun wrote the concurrence opinion. On the other hand, Justice William Brennan, Justice Thurgood Marshall, and Justice John Paul Stevens filed a dissenting opinion.
Rationale
The reason for the majority decision was the fact that the officers acted in good faith since they were following the legal provisions provided for by the search warrant. The court decided that officers who act in good faith and within the confines of a search warrant need not to be considered to be in abuse of the Fourth Amendment. In essence, it is the responsibility of the judge or the magistrate to make sure that the search warrant is based on sufficient information in determining a probable cause.
Impact
The outcome of this case set new legal precedence when it comes to determining how police get evidential information without being condemned for infringing on individuals’ privacy.
