Illinois v. Gates - Significance, The Exclusionary Rule, Invalid Warrant, Hints Of New Stance On Exclusionary Rule, Decision, "with Apologies"
State of Illinois
That evidence obtained via a search warrant that was later declared invalid could still convict.
Chief Lawyer for Petitioner
Paul J. Biebel, Jr., Assistant Attorney General of Illinois
Chief Lawyer for Respondent
James W. Reilley
Justices for the Court
Harry A. Blackmun, Warren E. Burger, Sandra Day O'Connor, Lewis F. Powell, Jr., William H. Rehnquist (writing for the Court), John Paul Stevens, Byron R. White
William J. Brennan, Jr., Thurgood Marshall
Date of Decision
8 June 1983
Reversed the Illinois Supreme Court's decision that prevented evidence seized from being presented at a criminal trial.
- Aguilar v. Texas, 378 U.S. 108 (1964).
- Spinelli v. United States, 393 U.S. 410 (1969).
- Kolendar v. Lawson, 461 U.S. 352 (1983).
- Illinois v. Lafayette - Significance, Further Readings
- Hustler Magazine Inc. v. Falwell - Significance, Political Cartoons Or Parodies
- Illinois v. Gates - Further Readings
- Illinois v. Gates - Significance
- Illinois v. Gates - The Exclusionary Rule
- Illinois v. Gates - Invalid Warrant
- Illinois v. Gates - Hints Of New Stance On Exclusionary Rule
- Illinois v. Gates - Decision, "with Apologies"
- Other Free Encyclopedias