According to the Bureau of Justice Statistics (2012), only 2 percent out of 1,226 cases were impacted by the exclusionary rule in the state of Montana. However, it is vitally important that the exclusionary rule is in place, because any evidence found was found admissible or relevant before the rule existed and it did not matter how the evidence was seized. At least, the people can now fight it in court and try to prove whether the search and seizure was unlawful. The Supreme Court Case Weeks v. United States was the changing point in acknowledging the conduct of unlawful searches, but only federal. Later, it affected the states such as the Mapp v. Ohio. The exclusionary rule is good have in place because it encourages police officer’s to be cautious when conducting searches (Farlex 2003). All in all, the exclusionary rule infleunces compliance with the rules regarding how the searches are