In Re Interest of Corey P.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that the exclusionary rule is inapplicable in juvenile protection proceedings because such application “may lead to an erroneous conclusion that there has been no abuse or neglect, leaving innocent children to remain in unhealthy or compromising circumstances”
• holding that any possible benefits of the exclusionary rule do not justify the costly result in a juvenile proceeding of a possible erroneous conclusion that there has been no abuse or neglect, leaving innocent children in unhealthy or compromising circumstances
• holding the Fourth Amendment was not violated by warrantless entries into the parental home by HHS personnel to determine compliance with court-imposed conditions for retaining physical custody of the children
• holding the exclusionary rule to be inapplicable in juvenile protection proceedings because such application “may lead to an erroneous conclusion that there has been no abuse or neglect, leaving innocent children to remain in unhealthy or compromising circumstances”
• “[A]pplication of the rule in juvenile proceedings may lead to an erroneous conclusion that there has been no abuse or neglect, leaving innocent children to remain in unhealthy or compromising circumstances”
• any possible benefits of the exclusionary rule do not justify the costly result in a juvenile proceeding of a possible erroneous conclusion that there has been no abuse or neglect, leaving innocent children in unhealthy or compromising circumstances

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).