United States v. Biliki Brimah

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that “the application of the exclusionary rule to the government’s case-in-chief still provides strong incentives for law enforcement officials to follow proper procedure in order to build as strong a case as possible against the defendant during the conviction phase of trial”
• joining nine other circuits in holding that “in most circumstances, the exclusionary rule does not bar the in- troduction of the fruits of illegal searches and seizures dur- ing sentencing proceedings”
• “[B]ecause illegally-seized evidence is not inherently unreliable, ... the exclusion of all such evidence at the sentencing phase would inhibit the ability of sentencing judges to impose fair and accurate punishments on defendants.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).