What other rationales are discussed in Mapp v. Ohio? If the other rationales were retained in Mapp v. Ohio, would we have the other good faith...

State governments should not be allowed to benefit from
federal violations of a person's constitutional rights, specifically 4th Amendment
rights to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures. The U. S. Supreme Court's
holding in Mapp v. Ohio eliminates the "silver platter" effect of its earlier reasoning,
extending the exclusionary rule to encompass state and local action as well as federal
action. The exceptions to the exclusionary rule became issues only after Mapp, which,
arguably, are tied to a trend toward more emphasis on crime control versus citizens'
civil rights.