Summary

Portrait of Hugo Black Hugo Black Bumper v. North Carolina — Dissent

When there is added to this the fact that the rifle, from which came the bullets which went into the bodies of the two victims, was found where Bumper lived, which was not far from the scene of the assault, this makes, as the North Carolina Supreme Court pointed out, assurance doubly sure. Whether one views the evidence of guilt with or without the rifle, the conclusion is inescapable that this defendant committed the crimes for which the jury convicted him. In these circumstances no State should be forced to give a new trial; justice does not require it.
Source: Wikisource

Portrait of Hugo Black Hugo Black Bumper v. North Carolina — Dissent

While little is known about the effect the exclusionary rule really has on actual police practices, I think it is a fair assumption that refusal to reverse a conviction of a defendant, because of the admission of illegally seized evidence, where other evidence conclusively demonstrates his guilt, is not going to lessen police sensitivity to the exclusionary rule, thereby reducing its deterrent effect.
Source: Wikisource

Portrait of Hugo Black Hugo Black Bumper v. North Carolina — Dissent

Leath voluntarily consented to this search, [4] and in fact that she actually wanted the officers to search her house-to prove to them that she had nothing to hide. Mrs. Leath's readiness to permit the search was the action of a person so conscious of her innocence, so proud of her own home, [5] that she was not going to require a search warrant, thus indicating a doubt about the rectitude of her household. There are such people in this world of ours, [6] and the evidence in this case causes me to believe Mrs. Leath is one of them.
Source: Wikisource

Get perspective with Kwize: daily news enlightened by great literature