Effects of Criminal Procedure on Crime Rates: Mapping Out the Consequences of the Exclusionary Rule
AbstractIn 1961, in its Mapp v. Ohio to ruling, the Supreme Court required every state to exclude from criminal trials evidence obtained in violation of the Fourth Amendment. This is the "exclusionary rule." At the time the Supreme Court issued its ruling, 24 states allowed ill-gotten evidence in their criminal trials, and 24 excluded it. An economic analysis of the search warrant process predicts an increase in crime rates after the Supreme Court forced states to adopt the exclusionary rule as police officers substitute away from searches toward alternatives they consider less effective. Our empirical analysis supports this theoretical prediction. We find a statistically and economically significant increase in crimes followed the Supreme Court's imposition of the exclusionary rule, with suburban cities bearing the brunt of the Supreme Court's decision.
Download InfoTo our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
1. Check below under "Related research" whether another version of this item is available online.
2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.
Bibliographic InfoArticle provided by University of Chicago Press in its journal Journal of Law and Economics.
Volume (Year): 46 (2003)
Issue (Month): 1 (April)
Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/JLE/
You can help add them by filling out this form.
CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
- Dhammika Dharmapala & Thomas J. Miceli, 2003.
"Search, Seizure and (False?) Arrest: An Analysis of Fourth Amendment Remedies when Police can Plant Evidence,"
2003-37, University of Connecticut, Department of Economics.
- Dhammika Dharmapala & Thomas J. Miceli, 2012. "Search, Seizure and (False?) Arrest: An Analysis of Fourth Amendment Remedies when Police can Plant Evidence," Working papers 2012-37, University of Connecticut, Department of Economics.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Journals Division).
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.