The Battalion. (College Station, Tex.) 1893-current, December 01, 1982, Image 16

Below is the OCR text representation for this newspapers page. It is also available as plain text as well as XML.

    I, ! ;
r 1
R !
I*" 1
ij
J I
i !
• 6£
' Me
sports
Battalion/Page 15
December 1,11
Warped
by Scott McCullar
High court to rule
on evidence policy
|ol. 76 N
Supreme Court hears debate
Abortion limits tested
United Press International
WASHINGTON — The Sup
reme Court, nearly a decade af
ter legalizing abortion, is now
examining state and local ob
stacles limiting the freedom to
end a pregnancy.
Three hours of oral argu
ments were held Tuesday be
fore the nine justices. An over-
llott 1 crowd was expected in the
courtroom to hear the explosive
case.
The restrictions before the
high court make it more dif ficult
In 1973, the court voted. 7-2,
to legalize abortions in the first
trimester, or three months, of
pregnancy.
Tuesday's argument focused
on restrictions of second-
trimester abortions imposed In
state and local governments in
Virginia, Missouri and Akron.
Ohio. These restrictions range
from mandator) hospitalization
and 24-hour waiting periods to
parental consent for minors.
The most junior justices —
John Paul Stevens and Sandra
Dav O’Connor, the first woman
to serve on the high bench —
confront the issue at the Sup
reme Court level for the first
time. Thev succeeded two mem
bers who both voted with the
majority in 1973 in favor of lega
lizing abortions.
Tuesday's argument ho
cused on restrictions of
second-trimester abor
tions imposed bv stale
and local governments
in Virginia, Missouri
and Akron, Ohio.
1 hese restrictions range
from mandatory hospi
talization and 24-hour
waiting periods to
parental consent for
minors.
to obtain a s<
abortion.
In the Virginia case, a physi
cian is appealing his criminal
conviction lor induc ing an abor
tion in a 17-vear-old who came
to his clinic when she was at least
four months pregnant.
Besides claiming the state
failed to prove the abortion was
not medically necessary, he con
tests the state law's requirement
that second-trimester abortions
be performed only in hospitals.
Medical and women’s groups
say requiring the procedure to
be performed in hospitals rather
than clinics substantially in
creases the expense, results in
unnecessary and perhaps harm
ful delay and “straitjackets” a
doctor’s medical judgment.
Hospitalization also is an issue
in the case challenging a 1978
Akron, Ohio, ordinance requir
ing doctors to describe to the pa
tient the anatomy of a fetus and
to tell her the “unborn child is a
human life from the moment of
conception.”
It also requires a 24-hour
waiting period, and mandates
abortions after the first three
months be performed in a hos
pital.
federal appeals
court in Cincinnati struck down
all but the hospitalization re
quirement, the high court
agreed to review the entire sta
tute.
The court's final decision in
the case will af fect the 22 states
that require women to check
into hospitals for second trimes
ter abortions.
Also bef ore the court is a chal
lenge to Missouri's 1979 anti
abortion statute that hits the
same hospitalization rule, but
that also requires minors depen
dent on their families to obtain
one parent’s consent for an
abortion.
Written rulings on the cases
are not expected before next
spring.
United Press International
WASHINGTON — In a sur
prise move, the Supreme Court
is jumping to the forefront of a
raging controversy over a legal
rule of evidence often blamed
for setting the guilty free on
technicalities.
On a 6-3 vote, the justices
Monday announced they will
consider creating a “good-faith"
exception to the “exclusionary
rule,” a much-criticized judicial
policy that bars the use of illegal
ly obtained evidence in criminal
trials.
The policy has been attacked
by the Reagan administration
and in legal and law enforce
ment circles because it prohibits
evidence or confessions from
being used in court if police
made even a technical mistake in
gathering the information.
I The Supreme Court could
defuse the entire political con
troversy if it decides to punch a
hole in the rigid exclusionary
rule by permitting judges to
overlook honest mistakes made
in “good faith” by police and to
admit evidence they collect to be
used against accused criminals.
The high court went out of its
way Monday to inject itself into
the dispute, leading at least one
attorney in the case to theorize
the justices may be “fighting
with each other” over the search
and seizure constitutional issue.
Attorneys for both sides were
baffled at what prompted the
justices’ untimely order dire
cting them to address the exclu
sionary rule issue in the Illinois
case over a search of Susan and
Lance Gates’ car and home.
Police obtained a warrant to
make the search based on an
anonymous tip. Even though
officials found 350 pounds of
marijuana in the trunk of the
couple’s car and more mari
juana, cocaine and drug para
phernalia in their home, the Illi
nois courts ruled the search was
illegal and barred evidence of
the drugs from being used
against the Gates.
On appeal from the state of
Illinois, the justices will consider
not only the value of anonymous
tips in obtaining search war
rants, but also whether to admit
the evidence anyway because
police acted in “good faith" in
making the search.
What is most unusual about
the high court’s action is that it
voted unanimously in March not
to tackle the “good-faith” issue
in the Illinois case and it already
heard arguments in the case on
Oct. 13. Now a second round of
ai gmnents will havetobeffl
t lie same < .isc, piob.iblvinM
The three dissentingjliil
also c omplained die exduf
ary rule issue was not bra
up before the lower ol
violating a SupremeCourtiii
lion against taking up issue
addressed by the lower(
first.
|ustices John Paul Slot |
William Brennan and Ti
good Marshall called their
leagues’ action “a llagtij
part ure f rom (the coufl]
tied practice.”
By going so far out of
to consider making excel
for honest police mistaks
court signals at least an intt
in breaking down the strict
against using evidence
during an improper
search or arrest.
However, the (iatess
nev, James Reillev of Cl
cautioned the case also
serve as a vehicle for the
court “to say the good-laill
ception is just not a viable
dard."
one potato,
COUPON
50£ off with any two entrees with this coupon. Ok
good until Dec. 17.
C
two potato...
Each Bite
an EDUCATION
in NUTRITION
Although
Phil B
inspect^
Cove, i
Craft S
and br
Corps
Nancy
show it