...fourth amendment: 17 "The rule is calculated to prevent, not to repair. Its purpose is to deter — to compel respect for the constitutional guaranty...— • by removing the incentive to disregard it." 18 Essentially the courts have reasoned that on balance it is preferable to protect the constitution...

...Only last year the Court itself recognized that the purpose of the exclusionary rule "is to deter — to compel respect for the constitutional guaranty...incentive to disregard it." Elkins v. United States, supra, at 217. Indeed, we are aware of no restraint, similar to that rejected today, conditioning the...

...exclusionary rule itself. The rule is calculated to prevent, not to repair. Its purpose is to deter — to compel respect for the constitutional guaranty...way — by removing the incentive to disregard it. See Eleuteri v. Richman, 26 NJ 506, 513, 141 A. 2d 46, 50. Mr. Justice Jackson summed it up well :...

...exclusionary rule itself. The rule is calculated to prevent, not to repair. Its purpose is to deter — to compel respect for the constitutional guaranty...way — by removing the incentive to disregard it. See Eleuteri v. Richman, 26 NJ 506, 513, 141 A. 2d 46, 50. Mr. Justice Jackson summed it up well: "Only...

...nothing short of mandatory exclusion of the illegal evidence will compel respect for the federal law "in the only effectively available way — by removing...to disregard it." Elkins v. United States, 364 US, at 217. Reversed. MR. JUSTICE BLACK, dissenting. In 1937, Nardone v. United States, 302 US 379, held...

...not mentioned in the State Warden's petition for a writ of certiorari. BLACK, J., dissenting. 394 US to compel respect for the constitutional guaranty...way — by removing the incentive to disregard it." This same recognition that no personal right of the prisoner can be vindicated in these Fourth Amendment...

...at 446; see Stone v. Powell, 428 US 465, 486 (1976); United States v. Calandra, 414 US 338, 347^*8 (1974). The exclusionary rule is "calculated to prevent,...[Tirado v. Commissioner, 689 F.2d 307, 309, 310 (2d Cir. 1982); fn. ref. omitted.] The majority assumes for purposes of this case that the Government's case...

...noted (364 US at 217): The rule is calculated to prevent, not to repair. Its purpose is to deter — to compel respect for the constitutional guaranty...way — by removing the incentive to disregard It. And in Camara v. Municipal Court, supra, which involved a warrantless search pursuant to the San Francisco...

...rules were fashioned "to prevent, not to repair," and their target is official misconduct. They are "to compel respect for the constitutional guaranty...disregard it." Elkins v. United States, 364 US 206, 217. But it is no part of the policy underlying the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments to discourage citizens...

..."to compel respect for the constitutional guarantee [to be free from unreasonable search and seizure] in the only effectively available way — by removing...incentive to disregard it." (Elkins v. United States (1960) 364 US 206, 217.) "By denying any profit from the unconstitutional methods of law enforcement...