ipl-logo

Dollree Mapp Exclusionary Rule Case

530 Words3 Pages

On May 23, 1957, police officers showed up to a house in Cleveland and demanded to be let inside. They believed a man who was recently involved in a bombing was hiding inside. Dollree Mapp, the woman who lived in the home refused to let them in. Ms. Mapp explained to the officers that she needed to see a search warrant before letting them enter the home. They were unable to provide one, so they left. They came back a few hours later bringing more officers, and forced their way into her home. Ms. Mapp contacted her lawyer regarding the matter and asked one more to see some sort of warrant allowing them to enter the home. One officer threw up a piece of paper that he claimed was a warrant, Ms. Mapp grabbed it and hid it in her shirt. One officers had forced entry into the home, …show more content…

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in a 5-3 vote in favor of Mapp. The Supreme Court stated that evidence obtained from an unreasonable or illegal search and seizure couldn’t be used against the accused in state court. Before the ruling, federal courts were required to suppress evidence gathered illegally. The decision extended the rule — known as the exclusionary rule — to state courts. The change has put continuing pressure on police departments to conduct investigations lawfully and brought increased scrutiny when their actions appear improper. Numerous cases have been affected by this, and sometimes they’re even thrown out. The exclusionary rule is very controversial. Critics argue that if the police act improperly or illegally they should face punishment for breaking the law, but evidence should not be excluded from court. In the past 25 years court rulings have made exceptions to the exclusionary rule in certain cases or circumstances when evidence was gathered illegally or improperly. For example, if a police officer appears to have made a mistake or error while having good intentions, when it followed incorrect legal guidance or relied on incorrect information provided by another

Show More
Related

  • Summary Of Kyllo V. United States

    549 Words  | 3 Pages

    In this case Kyllo v. United States, the Supreme Court ruled against the vitric of the lower courts on a 5 to 4 vote. The questions that need to be answered in this case, in my opinion serve a bigger purpose then the case at hand. The case itself is about a man named Danny Kyllo who was growing marijuana plants inside his home illegally. An officer of the U.S Interior Department got a tip that this man was illegally growing plants inside his home and went to investigate this. Obviously a tip from an unknown is not enough information to get a warrant to search the man’s property.

    Read More

  • What Happened To Dispatch Jene Sisson's Arrest?

    202 Words  | 1 Pages

    On 04-09-2016 at 0315 hours I noticed a pickup stopped on Main Street about Mulberry Street with the passenger door open. The vehicle then turned onto Mulberry Street and pulled to the side of the road. I made contact with the occupants of the vehicle and was advised by dispatch Jenae Sisson had an active warrant for her arrest. Sisson was placed under arrest and placed into hand restraints which were properly fitting and double locked.

    Read More

  • Chimel Vs. California Case Study

    455 Words  | 2 Pages

    Title: Chimel v. California Date/Court: United States Supreme Court, 1969 Facts: This case deals with Ted Chimel, who they suspected robbed a local coin shop. On September 13, 1965, several officers from Santa Ana came to the home of Chimel with an arrest warrant for his expected involvement in the burglary. The officers arrived at the door and identified themselves to Chimel’s wife and asked if they could come into the home, she agreed and showed them into the house. While in the house the officers waited 10-15 minutes until Chimel came home from work.

    Read More

  • Supreme Court Case: The Case Of Mapp Vs. Ohio

    354 Words  | 2 Pages

    On May 23, 1957, three police officers in the city of Cleveland, Ohio knocked on the door of Dolly Mapp and held up a piece of paper that wasn’t the warrant that gave them access inside. The three officers gave Mapp very little information as to why they were there. The real reason they were there was because an anonymous phone tip stated that Virgil Ogletree, a suspect of a recent bombing, was

    Read More

  • Exclusionary Rule In The Weeks V. United States Case

    475 Words  | 2 Pages

    The Weeks v United States case was the Supreme Court basis in determining to incorporate the Fourth Amendment into the Fourteenth Amendment due process clause and apply the exclusionary rule in state cases. In this essay, I am going to discuss the reason why the Supreme Court determine that the exclusionary rule should apply to the state police activity. Prior to the case of Weeks v United States, the state police activity “were not limited in their conduct by the Fourth Amendment” (Ingram p.81) and the exclusionary rule of Fourth Amendments illegal search and seizure only applies to federal law enforcement officers. Basically, it means that state law enforcement officials can illegally search and seized criminal activity evidence and court don’t prohibit the use of illegally obtained evidence in the trial court.

    Read More

  • What Is The Steven Avery Case

    939 Words  | 4 Pages

    In July 1985 at approximately 3 o’clock in the afternoon Penny Beerntsen started her run along the Lake Michigan shoreline. And was apprehended by an unknown man where she was brutally attacked and sexually assaulted. At Memorial Hospital, Penny was getting her wounds examined

    Read More

  • Supreme Court Case Of Ohio Terry V. Ohio

    885 Words  | 4 Pages

    If the police were to conduct a search without a warrant or consent in this situation, any and all evidence found would be prohibited from use against the suspect in the court of law. This rule is called the exclusionary law, created under the Supreme Court ruling of Mapp v. Ohio (Mapp v. Ohio, 1961), states that any evidence that is illegally obtained during an investigation cannot be used in the court of

    Read More

  • Scalia's Principal Argument For Violating The Exclusionary Rule

    450 Words  | 2 Pages

    I don’t think officer did it right by violating the exclusionary rule, but if they believed that it was too dangerous for them, they sure did it right. I believe

    Read More

  • Wolf V. Colorado Case Brief

    584 Words  | 3 Pages

    The police violated Wolf’s rights and since there was no warrant for arrest or warrant to search his office the police was trespassing. The police officer who violated his rights was to be punished by his superiors. The judges decided that using such evidence goes completely against the Fourth Amendment which is a basic need to our freedom. States should follow this law but are not directly forced to. States using evidence that should be excluded in their “statute becomes a form, and its protection an illusion,”(Wolf v Colorado, 1949).

    Read More

  • Search And Seizure Law: Detrimental Issues In The Criminal Justice System

    181 Words  | 1 Pages

    Search and seizure law is actually one of the detrimental issues in the criminal justice system. Many officers are sometimes faced with constraints and are not able to work properly given that they fail to understand and distinguish between situations when search warrant are required ( Del, 2014). In incidents that have lawful arrest as well as when there is a plain view exception. In areas where consent is given by a person in authority, there is no need for the search warrant required together with the police stops and frisking a person whom they have a reasonable suspicion on of an act that is equated to a crime. Another example is when a situation is an emergency and there is a hot pursuit given the evidence may disappear before the warrant

    Read More

  • Why Is The Exclusionary Rule Important

    428 Words  | 2 Pages

    The Exclusionary Rule is an important constitutional principle of modern criminal procedure law in the United States. Generally, it prohibits the summary at criminal trial of any evidence seized or otherwise obtained in violation of the Fourth Amendment to the Constitution. Under the Exclusionary Rule, unsuitably obtained evidence that leads to the subsequent discovery of other incriminating evidence automatically invalidates or "poisons" the newly discovered derivative evidence in the same way that a poisonous tree taints the fruits growing on any of its branches. While it stems from the Fourth Amendment, it is not actually enclosed anywhere within the text of the Constitution or its Amendments. In fact, it was judicially shaped more than a century after the Constitution was approved in 1789 and the Fourth Amendment

    Read More

  • Mapp Vs. Ohio Case Study

    316 Words  | 2 Pages

    In Wolf vs. Colorado the Supreme Court had decided that it did not. Illegally obtained evidence could be used in trials because the 4th amendment did not apply to states. The principle became known as the exclusionary

    Read More

  • Explain The Four Exceptions To The Exclusionary Rule

    110 Words  | 1 Pages

    The exclusionary rule explain that collected evidence must not be a violation of the defendant’s constitutional rights or else it could be inadmissible in court. The four exceptions to the Exclusionary rule are the Good-Faith exception, the Plain-View Doctrine, Clerical Errors Doctrine, and the Emergency Searches of Property. The exceptions are used to protect officers if they do something in good faith or in emergency. However these exceptions are only used to protect the officers who acted in good faith. This exceptions cannot help officers if they acted with malicious intent.

    Read More

  • Mapp Vs Ohio Case Study

    1872 Words  | 8 Pages

    41. Mapp v. Ohio (1961): The Supreme Court ruling that decided that the fourth amendment’s protection against unreasonable searches and seizures must be extended to the states. If there is no probable cause or search warrant issued legally, the evidence found unconstitutionally will be inadmissible in the courtroom and not even considered when pressing charges. The exclusionary rule, in this case, is a right that will restrict the states and not just the federal government, including the states in more of the federal rights as outlined in the Constitution.

    Read More

  • Arguments Against The Exclusionary Rule

    493 Words  | 2 Pages

    Ohio (1961), the Supreme Court trusted that the Constitution charged the exclusionary rule as a remaking of a Fourth Amendment infringement. They saw the truths of the sample, the exclusionary rule which was the assurance of somebody 's protection furthermore required by the Due Process which portrayed the Fourteenth Amendment. The rule stated three purposes by the Mapp Court, the right given by the constitution and stated that when police admitted that they were at fault, judges then extended the violations in court. This would stop misconduct for negligence since the case of Mapp the Supreme Court has seized out many exceptions to the exclusionary rule. I would agree with exclusionary rule, searches are easy to get permission from most defendants.

    Read More

More about Dollree Mapp Exclusionary Rule Case

Open Document