In Connecticut, the good faith exception is not applicable to the exclusionary rule.

• A. It is true
• B. It is false
• C. It depends on the case
• D. Good faith exception is not applicable in CT

Answer: (D)

The main concept here is that the good-faith exception to the exclusionary rule applies in Connecticut. This doctrine allows evidence obtained during searches or seizures conducted in reasonable reliance on a warrant or statute that is later found defective to be admitted at trial. It comes from United States v. Leon and, through incorporation of the Fourth Amendment, applies to state prosecutions as well, including Connecticut. In practical terms, if officers reasonably believe a warrant is valid and act on it, the evidence they gather can be admitted even if the warrant is later deemed flawed. There are limits, though: the exception typically does not apply if the warrant is so facially defective that no reasonable officer would rely on it, or if the police knowingly lied or misled the magistrate, or otherwise acted in bad faith. With these standards, the statement that Connecticut does not allow the good-faith exception is not correct; Connecticut recognizes and applies the good-faith exception just as federal law does.