Does the exclusionary rule apply when police arrest someone mistakenly but in good faith?

The exclusionary rule serves as a legal principle that prevents evidence collected through violations of a defendant's constitutional rights from being used in court. This rule is primarily designed to deter law enforcement from engaging in unconstitutional practices.

In the context of a mistaken arrest made in good faith by police, the exclusionary rule would not apply if the officers believe they had probable cause for the arrest, even if it later turns out to be incorrect. This principle stems from the idea that the deterrent effect of the exclusionary rule is less impactful if the police acted reasonably based on the information available at the time, thus supporting the notion of good faith.

In summary, when police arrest an individual mistakenly but reasonably believe in their actions, the exclusionary rule typically does not apply, allowing the evidence obtained during such an arrest to remain admissible in court. This allows for judicial processes to continue without being hindered by the occasional errors made by law enforcement, provided those errors were made in good faith.