Question

An investigator used tips from an informant to establish the probable cause needed to obtain a search warrant for a suspected drug house. The investigator served the warrant and searched the house and found a large number of illicit drugs. The owner was arrested for drug trafficking. Shortly after, the owner tried to cite the exclusionary rule for his defense, claiming that the creditability of the informant did not establish the needed probable cause to obtain a warrant. However, the courts denied his claim. Which of the following exemptions to the exclusionary rule denied him the opportunity?

Answer 1

The drug house owner's exclusionary rule defense was most likely denied by the court due to the good faith exception, where the court allows evidence obtained from a warrant officers believed to be valid, even if there were issues with the actual warrant.

Step-by-step explanation:

In the scenario provided, the court denied the drug house owner's defense to use the exclusionary rule, likely due to the good faith exception. This exception allows the court to admit evidence obtained with a warrant if the officers executing the warrant believed it was issued properly, even if there were issues with the warrant itself. Since the officers, in this case, acted based on a warrant obtained from a judge, likely with the information provided via the informant, the belief in the validity of the warrant could make the good faith exception applicable.

Another relevant exception might be the inevitable discovery exception, which allows the admission of evidence if the court determines that the evidence would have eventually been discovered through lawful means. However, based on the information given, the good faith exception is the more likely reason the owner's attempt to leverage the exclusionary rule was denied.