Ahart v. Colorado Department of Corrections, Division of Adult Services, Buena Vista Correctional Facility
Supreme Court of Colorado
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Bender
The issue before us is whether to extend the exclusionary rule enunciated in Weeks v. United States, 232 U.S. 383, 398, 34 S.Ct. 341, 58 L.Ed. 652 (1914) to civil hearings to terminate a correctional officer for admitted drug use. We decline to apply the rule to this case.
The exclusionary rule is a judicially created remedy intended to protect the constitutional right of privacy by deterring illegal police conduct. The exclusionary rule bars evidence from trial that police obtain by violating an accused’s constitutional right to privacy. Wong Sun v. United States, 371 U.S. 471, 485, 83 S.Ct.…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Wong Sun v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
- Mapp v. OhioSupreme Court of the United States · 1961
- Weeks v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1914
- Rochin v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1952
- United States v. JanisSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by15 opinions
- Compass Insurance Co. v. City of LittletonSupreme Court of Colorado · 1999
- Francen v. Colorado Department of Revenue, Division of Motor VehiclesSupreme Court of Colorado · 2014
- People ex rel. A.E.L.Colorado Court of Appeals · 2008
- Hanson v. Colorado Department of Revenue, Division of Motor VehiclesSupreme Court of Colorado · 2014
- for a Safe and Independent Woodmen Hills v. Campaign Integrity Watchdog, LLCSupreme Court of Colorado · 2019
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.