MPOETC Act 120 Practice Exam 2025 – Complete Test Prep Guide

Nix v. Williams is significant as it established the inevitable discovery rule in relation to the exclusionary rule. This case clarified that evidence obtained through unlawful means can still be admissible in court if it can be demonstrated that the evidence would have been discovered inevitably through lawful procedures. Specifically, the case involved the police unlawfully obtaining a suspect's statements, which led them to the recovery of a body. The Supreme Court ruled that because the body would have been discovered through lawful police activity, the evidence was admissible despite the initial unlawful search.

The other cases mentioned address different legal principles. Miranda v. Arizona focuses on the requirement for law enforcement to inform suspects of their rights during custodial interrogations. Terry v. Ohio deals with the constitutionality of stop-and-frisk procedures, emphasizing the balance between officer safety and individual rights. Ferguson v. City of Charleston addresses issues related to medical privacy and the legality of drug testing expectant mothers without consent. Each of these cases contributes to the broader context of criminal procedure and individuals' rights, but Nix v. Williams specifically addresses the inevitable discovery rule within the exclusionary framework.