United States v. Calandra, 414 U.S. 338 (1974)
United States v. Calandra is a leading Supreme Court case that tackled the boundaries of the exclusionary rule, specifically within the context of grand jury proceedings.
Does the exclusionary rule apply to grand jury proceedings, thereby allowing individuals subpoenaed to testify before a grand jury to refuse to answer questions based on evidence obtained through an unconstitutional search?
The exclusionary rule does not extend to grand jury proceedings. This rule is intended to deter law enforcement from conducting unlawful searches and seizures and to preserve judicial integrity by preventing illegally obtained evidence from impacting adjudicative processes.
The Supreme Court reversed the lower courts' decisions, holding that the exclusionary rule does not apply in grand jury proceedings. The Court determined that applying the rule in such a setting would impede the grand jury's investigatory function.
For law students, United States v. Calandra elucidates the boundaries of the exclusionary rule. It is foundational in understanding how the exclusionary rule's purpose — deterring illegal searches and seizures — must be balanced against other judicial and governmental functions. This case highlights the Court's approach to maintaining the efficacy of the grand jury system, underscoring its vital role in criminal justice. Furthermore, it serves as a reference point for discussions on the extension of rights protections across different procedural phases in criminal law.