美国证据排除规则的衰变及其启示——以Herring v. United States案为主线的考察

2009年1月的Herring v.United States案判决是近年来美国联邦最高法院关于证据排除规则方面影响最大的判决,它确立了＂过失行为所得非法证据不适用证据排除＂的新规则。该判决以其不同以往任何案例的特殊性引发了关于证据排除的存在必要性、适用范围、审查模式等一系列问题的理论探讨和实务争议。以该判决前后美国联邦最高法院的态度转变和学界回应为鉴,我国证据排除规则的确立应定位于阻吓违法行为,以过错原则为判断标准,并配合职务监督方式施行。

The Declination of US Exclusionary Rule and Its Implication

The U.S.Supreme Court＇s judgment on Herring v.United States in January of 2009 is the most influential judgment about exclusionary rule in recent years,which set a new rule that evidence obtained through negligent violation of the Fourth Amendment is not to be excluded.The Herring judgment,which is different from any other judgment before in the field of exclusionary rule,stirred controversy in both academic and legal communities about the necessity of the existence of exclusionary rule,the application scope of exclusionary rule,and the model of application assessment.Based on the analysis of U.S.Supreme Court＇s change and the controversy,the proposal is our future exclusionary rule should establish the deterrence rationale and adopt the principle of fault liability.In addition,discipline measures should be integrated with it as well.