Illinois v. Krull
E545161
Illinois v. Krull is a 1987 U.S. Supreme Court decision that extended the good-faith exception to the exclusionary rule to evidence obtained by police relying on a statute later found unconstitutional.
All labels observed (1)
| Label | Occurrences |
|---|---|
| Illinois v. Krull canonical | 1 |
How this entity was disambiguated
This entity first appeared as the object of triple T5770518 — resolving that mention is where its identity was fixed. The disambiguator weighed these candidate entities and picked the highlighted one (or “None”, minting a new entity). This is how homonymy is resolved: the same surface form can point to different entities.
NED1
Entity disambiguation (via context triple)
gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07
Target entity: Illinois v. Krull Context triple: [United States v. Leon, subsequentCitationBy, Illinois v. Krull]
-
A.
Illinois v. Wardlow
Illinois v. Wardlow is a 2000 U.S. Supreme Court decision that held an individual's unprovoked flight in a high-crime area can contribute to reasonable suspicion justifying a stop under the Fourth Amendment.
-
B.
Moore v. Illinois
Moore v. Illinois is a United States Supreme Court decision addressing constitutional criminal procedure issues, particularly concerning the rights of defendants in state prosecutions.
-
C.
Scott v. Illinois
Scott v. Illinois is a 1979 U.S. Supreme Court decision that held the Sixth Amendment right to appointed counsel applies only when a defendant is actually sentenced to imprisonment, thereby limiting the broader protections suggested in Argersinger v. Hamlin.
-
D.
Escobedo v. Illinois
Escobedo v. Illinois is a landmark 1964 U.S. Supreme Court case that expanded the Sixth Amendment right to counsel during police interrogations and helped lay the groundwork for the later Miranda warnings.
-
E.
Munn v. Illinois
Munn v. Illinois is an 1877 U.S. Supreme Court case that upheld state regulation of private industries affecting the public interest, marking a key moment in the development of government regulatory power.
- F. None of above. chosen
- G. Unsure - the case is ambiguous/there is not enough information to decide.
NED2
Entity disambiguation (via description)
gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07
Target entity: Illinois v. Krull Target entity description: Illinois v. Krull is a 1987 U.S. Supreme Court decision that extended the good-faith exception to the exclusionary rule to evidence obtained by police relying on a statute later found unconstitutional.
-
A.
Illinois v. Wardlow
Illinois v. Wardlow is a 2000 U.S. Supreme Court decision that held an individual's unprovoked flight in a high-crime area can contribute to reasonable suspicion justifying a stop under the Fourth Amendment.
-
B.
Moore v. Illinois
Moore v. Illinois is a United States Supreme Court decision addressing constitutional criminal procedure issues, particularly concerning the rights of defendants in state prosecutions.
-
C.
Scott v. Illinois
Scott v. Illinois is a 1979 U.S. Supreme Court decision that held the Sixth Amendment right to appointed counsel applies only when a defendant is actually sentenced to imprisonment, thereby limiting the broader protections suggested in Argersinger v. Hamlin.
-
D.
Escobedo v. Illinois
Escobedo v. Illinois is a landmark 1964 U.S. Supreme Court case that expanded the Sixth Amendment right to counsel during police interrogations and helped lay the groundwork for the later Miranda warnings.
-
E.
Munn v. Illinois
Munn v. Illinois is an 1877 U.S. Supreme Court case that upheld state regulation of private industries affecting the public interest, marking a key moment in the development of government regulatory power.
- F. None of above. chosen
Statements (45)
| Predicate | Object |
|---|---|
| instanceOf |
United States Supreme Court case
ⓘ
criminal procedure case ⓘ |
| areaOfLaw |
constitutional law
ⓘ
criminal law ⓘ criminal procedure ⓘ |
| citation |
107 S. Ct. 1160
ⓘ
480 U.S. 340 ⓘ 94 L. Ed. 2d 364 ⓘ |
| constitutionalProvision | Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| country |
United States of America
ⓘ
surface form:
United States
|
| court | Supreme Court of the United States ⓘ |
| decisionDate | 1987-03-09 ⓘ |
| decisionType | 5–4 decision ⓘ |
| dissentingOpinionBy |
Justice Antonin Scalia
NERFINISHED
ⓘ
Justice John Paul Stevens NERFINISHED ⓘ Justice Thurgood Marshall NERFINISHED ⓘ Justice William J. Brennan Jr. NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| docketNumber | 85-608 ⓘ |
| exclusionaryRuleRationale | deterrence of police misconduct, not legislative misconduct ⓘ |
| goodFaithStandard | objectively reasonable reliance on a statute ⓘ |
| holding |
The exclusionary rule does not require suppression of evidence obtained by officers acting in objectively reasonable reliance on a statute later declared unconstitutional.
ⓘ
The good-faith exception to the exclusionary rule applies when police reasonably rely on a statute that is subsequently found to violate the Fourth Amendment. ⓘ |
| impact | expanded the scope of the good-faith exception beyond reliance on warrants ⓘ |
| joinedByInMajority |
Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist
NERFINISHED
ⓘ
Justice Antonin Scalia NERFINISHED ⓘ Justice Byron R. White NERFINISHED ⓘ Justice Lewis F. Powell Jr. NERFINISHED ⓘ Justice Sandra Day O’Connor NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| jurisdiction |
United States of America
ⓘ
surface form:
United States
|
| languageOfDecision | English ⓘ |
| legalIssue |
Fourth Amendment search and seizure
NERFINISHED
ⓘ
good-faith exception to the exclusionary rule ⓘ scope of the exclusionary rule ⓘ |
| majorityOpinionBy | Justice Harry A. Blackmun NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| originatingState | Illinois NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| party |
Edward Krull
NERFINISHED
ⓘ
State of Illinois NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| relatedCase |
Michigan v. DeFillippo
NERFINISHED
ⓘ
Stone v. Powell NERFINISHED ⓘ United States v. Leon NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| relatedDoctrine |
exclusionary rule
ⓘ
good-faith exception ⓘ |
| result | Judgment of the Illinois courts reversed ⓘ |
| subsequentCitationFrequency | frequently cited in Fourth Amendment good-faith exception cases ⓘ |
| term | 1986 Term ⓘ |
How these facts were elicited
The pipeline generated the facts above by prompting gpt-5.1 with this entity's name + description and the instruction below.
Instruction
You are a knowledge base construction expert. Given a subject entity and a description of it, return factual statements that you know for the subject as a JSON list of dictionaries(triples), where keys must be "subject", "predicate" and "object". The number of facts may be very high, between 25 to 50 or more, for very popular subjects. For less popular subjects, the number of facts can be very low, like 5 or 10. # Requirements - If you don't know the subject at all, return an empty list. - If the subject is not a named entity, return an empty list. - Include at least one triple where predicate is "instanceOf". - Do not get too wordy. - Separate several objects into multiple triples with one object.
Input
Subject: Illinois v. Krull Description of subject: Illinois v. Krull is a 1987 U.S. Supreme Court decision that extended the good-faith exception to the exclusionary rule to evidence obtained by police relying on a statute later found unconstitutional.
Referenced by (1)
Full triples — surface form annotated when it differs from this entity's canonical label.