In Illinois v. Krull (1987) 480 U.S. 340, the court extended the good faith exception to evidence seized under a statute that was declared unconstitutional in an unrelated case the day after the search was conducted. While recognizing that officers cannot generally be expected to question the judgment of legislative bodies in enacting putatively constitutional laws ( id. at pp. 350-351), the Supreme Court in Illinois v. Krull and United States v. Leon also placed limits on the good faith exception. Its application does not depend on the subjective good faith of individual officers, but on the objective reasonableness of the officers' reliance on a defective warrant or statute. ( Illinois v. Krull, supra, 480 U.S. at p. 355.) Such a standard "requires officers to have a reasonable knowledge of what the law prohibits." ( United States v. Leon, 468 U.S. at p. 920, fn. 20) In particular, "a statute cannot support objectively reasonable reliance if, in passing the statute, the legislature wholly abandoned its responsibility to enact constitutional laws." ( Illinois v. Krull, supra, 480 U.S. at p. 355.) The Supreme Court held that the exclusionary rule does not apply when an officer acted in objectively reasonable reliance on a statute which authorized an administrative search without a warrant, but the statute is later declared unconstitutional. (Krull, supra, 480 U.S. at pp. 343, 349-350.) Suppression of the evidence "would have as little deterrent effect on the officer's actions as would the exclusion of evidence when an officer acts in objectively reasonable reliance on a warrant." (Id. at p. 349.) "Unless a statute is clearly unconstitutional, an officer cannot be expected to question the judgment of the legislature that passed the law. If the statute is subsequently declared unconstitutional, excluding evidence obtained pursuant to it prior to such a judicial declaration will not deter future Fourth Amendment violations by an officer who has simply fulfilled his responsibility to enforce the statute as written." (Id. at pp. 349-350 94 L.Ed.2d at p. 375.)