The Exclusionary Rule as a Remedy

Simple item page
dc.creatorLoewy, Arnold H.
dc.date.accessioned2021-09-13T18:56:25Z
dc.date.available2021-09-13T18:56:25Z
dc.date.issued2013
dc.description.abstractArgues that the Court was correct in concluding that the exclusionary rule is a remedy, rather than a right. The advocates that the Court has been incorrect in its parsimonious use of the exclusionary rule as a remedy in that the Court consistently undervalues the importance of the exclusionary rule and, at the same time, overrates the harm that the rule can do.en_US
dc.identifier.citationArnold H. Loewy, The Exclusionary Rule as a Remedy, 46 Tex. Tech L. Rev. 369 (2013-2014)en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/2346/87830
dc.language.isoengen_US
dc.publisherTexas Tech Law Reviewen_US
dc.subjectFourth Amendments violationsen_US
dc.subjectExclusionary ruleen_US
dc.subjectMapp v. Ohioen_US
dc.subjectFourth Amendment as a device for protecting the innocenten_US
dc.subjectHudson v. Michiganen_US
dc.subjectWilson v. Arkansasen_US
dc.subjectRichards v. Wisconsinen_US
dc.subjectExclusionary rule as a remedyen_US
dc.titleThe Exclusionary Rule as a Remedyen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US

Files

Original bundle

Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Thumbnail Image
Name:
19_46TexTechLRev369(2013-2014).pdf
Size:
475.09 KB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Description:
Download

License bundle

Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
No Thumbnail Available
Name:
license.txt
Size:
1.57 KB
Format:
Item-specific license agreed upon to submission
Description:
Download

Collections

Texas Tech Law Review