CC RESOLUTION 3121� w9'
n
•
•
t ESODUTTION NO. 3121
A RESOLL"IION OF THE CITY COI7AICIL OF Pry CITY OF EL
SEGTJNDO SLTPORTING SENA`�.r CONSTI' UTIONAL .A1YENDDF-IV'T 7
The EL SEGTJNDO City Council hereby resolves as
follows
ldlii,, _S, the "exclusionary ruleP1 has complicated and
negated the work of police departments in confessions and admis-
sions, search and seizure and use of evidence; and,
tvT1EREAS, it appears that the California Supreme Court has
ignored. the U.S. Supreme Court; has expanded the exclusion of evi-
dence unreasonably; end, has imposed its views on the people of
this states by judicial fiat, often by a bare ma „�ority of four
justices; and.,
I:IMRE.kS , in People vs. Cahan 25 years ago, the Supreme
Court promised workable rules governing searches and seizures that
would pro-tect both the rights 6iiaranteed by the U. S. Constitution
and the _i — 'erests of society in suppressing crime. Amd., we 'have
not Detained a balance s et��ree i these. competing interests but; ,a
system of just-ice heavily weighted in favor of the criminal de--•
f eridan t; and.,
TWHE c.AS , Cahan also promised that the exc'l.usionar v rule
woul.d not be arbitrary in its application and would avoid i eedless
limitations on the right of the police to conduct reasonable
searches and seizures. Yet, the exclusionary rule punishes g.od—
fait's police mistakes and minor intrusions into one's privacy with
the same sanctions as are applied to intentional and substantiuted
police misconduct.
NOW, TIRE OR.E, BE IT RESCLITED.-THAT in the 2 years since
Cahah,- our experience dictates another change. The proposed con- -
stitut onal amendment, SCA 7. would not cure all the ills of our
state's criminal justice system. It would, however, prevent the
C 'is " "oz,aia_ Supreme Court from unilaterally extending 'the rights of
a criminal - defendant beyond those rights guaranteed by the U.S.
Ccn.stitutiox? . When experimezataticn is desired, this amendment
enables the California Legislature, in open public debates, to
determine what- restrictions, if any, should be placed upon 'the
admission of evidence beyond those provided for in the
Ur S. Constitution.
BE IT FURTIEHR RESOLVED THAT the FL Sr'C-0vD0
City
Gcuncil hereby supports Senate Constitutiona,. Amendment 1 and
urges the state legislature to place the amendment on the June
1.782 ballot for consideration by the Doter. s of the state.
P,A.SSED, APPR( <TZD and AD0F'!FD this 16th day of February—_-, 1982.
AIMS. _. p
i?ayar —Jof' the City of El Seudc, 2liforriiao
City Clerk f_
(SEA:L)
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) SS
CITY OF EL SEGUNDO )
LJ
1, Valerie A. Burrowes , City Clerk of the
City of El Segundo, California, DO HEREBY CERTIFY that the
whole number of members of the City Council of the said City is
five; that the foregoing resolution, being Resolution No. 3121
was duly passed and adopted by the said City Council, approved
and signed by the Mayor of said City, and attested by the City
Clerk of said City, all at a regular meeting of the said Council
held on the 16th day of February _,19 82
and that the same was so passed and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Councilmen Armstrong, Bue, Johnson��_
Siadek, and Mayor Van Vranken
NOES: Councilmen None
ABSENT: Councilmen None
WITNESS MY HAND AND THE OFFICIAL SEAL OF SAID
CITY this 16th day of
L
( SEA L)
1]
February
19 82 .
City Clerk of the City of El Segundo,
California
1.2640