How has the Disbrow Court ever been persuaded of the unsoundness of the Harris-Nudd rule?

Finally, the Disbrow court was persuaded of the unsoundness of the Harris-Nudd rule "by a significant rationale of the exclusionary rule itself. [44 Cal.3d 330] In People v. Cahan (1955) 44 Cal.2d 434, 445 [282 P.2d 905, 50 A.L.R.2d 513], the landmark case in which this court adopted the rule for California two decades ago, we said, 'the success of the lawless venture depends entirely on the court's lending its aid by allowing the evidence to be introduced.... Out of regard for its own dignity as an agency of justice and custodian of liberty the court should not have a hand in such "dirty business." ' " (Id. at p. 113, 127 Cal.Rptr. 360, 545 P.2d 272, fn. omitted.)