In U.S. v Leon, what does the court state about evidence obtained with a deficient search warrant?

In U.S. v. Leon, the court established a significant precedent regarding the use of evidence obtained through a deficient search warrant. The ruling indicates that if law enforcement officials act on a warrant they reasonably believe to be valid, even if the warrant is later deemed deficient, the evidence obtained may still be admissible in court. This is based on the principle of "good faith," which holds that if officers are acting under the assumption that they are following legal procedures and have a valid warrant, the evidence should not be excluded merely because of technical flaws in the warrant. The court recognized that excluding such evidence would not serve the interests of justice, especially if the officers genuinely believed they were operating within the law at the time of the search. This good faith exception balances the need for law enforcement to effectively investigate and enforce the law without unduly compromising the rights of individuals.