Is evidence obtained during a search reasonable reliance on binding precedent subject to exclusionary rule?

"Evidence obtained during a search conducted in reasonable reliance on binding precedent is not subject to the exclusionary rule." (Davis v. United States (2011) __ U.S. __, __ [131 S.Ct. 2419, 2429].) "Exclusion is 'not a personal constitutional right,' nor is it designed to 'redress the injury' occasioned by an unconstitutional search." (Id. at p. 2426.) The exclusionary rule's "sole purpose" is "to deter future Fourth Amendment violations." (Ibid.) "[T]he deterrence benefits of exclusion 'var[y] with the culpability of the law enforcement conduct' at issue. [Citation.] When the police exhibit 'deliberate,' 'reckless,' or 'grossly negligent' disregard for Fourth Amendment rights, the deterrent value of exclusion is strong and tends to outweigh the resulting costs. [Citation.] But when the police act with an objectively 'reasonable good-faith belief' that their conduct is lawful, [citation], or when their conduct involves only simple, 'isolated' negligence [citation], the ' "deterrence rationale loses much of its force," ' and exclusion cannot 'pay its way.' " (Id. at pp. 2427-2428.)