The admissibility of illegally seized evidence is generally:

• A. Admissible in all cases
• B. Admissible if the officer acted in good faith
• C. Admissible if the defendant consents
• D. Generally inadmissible in court

Answer: (D)

The main idea is the exclusionary rule: evidence gathered through illegal searches or seizures is generally not admissible in court. This rule serves to deter police misconduct and protect individuals’ Fourth Amendment rights, so the default position is that illegally obtained evidence cannot be used to prove guilt. There are narrow exceptions—such as when officers reasonably rely on a warrant in good faith, or when the person voluntarily consents to the search, or in other limited circumstances—that can allow such evidence to be admitted. Without one of these exceptions, the evidence remains inadmissible.