ipl-logo

The Case Of Mapp V. Ohio

992 Words4 Pages

It was a very small gesture that led to the Supreme Court case, which changed how the police are able to do their job. Mapp v. Ohio was a case in which the United States had to go against first judgement and question if the decision they made in the first place was a smart one. By ruling in favor of Dolly Mapp the supreme court decided that you need to have a valid search warrant which prohibits unreasonable searches and seizures.
On May 23, 1957 three police officers showed up at Dolly Mapps house to investigate a recent bombing. They suspected that the man who had information about the bombing was hiding inside her house. The officers didn’t give Mapp any information about why they were there and what was happening. The bomb had exploded …show more content…

They questioned Ogletree and then released him with no hesitation. He was not charged with any connection with the bombing. However, Mapp didn’t get let off so easily. Sergeant Delau questioned her and charged her with the possession of the gambling paraphernalia and obscene materials. At the time, these objects were illegal in Ohio. Neither Mapp nor her attorney, Greene, were ever permitted to see the search warrant. At first Mapp pleaded guilty to the charge of possession of obscene material, but she late withdrew her guilty plea of not guilty. She was arrested in May 1957, yet her trial would be September …show more content…

The supreme court voted 6-3 in favor of Mapp. Five justices ruled that the state needed to exclude evidence found without a search warrant. The majority opinion applied the exclusionary rule to the states. The exclusionary rule requires courts to exclude from criminal trials evidence that was accessed in violation of the constitution’s ban on unreasonable searches. The majority opinion was based on many earlier decisions that had started the process of employing federal constitutional protections to state criminal justice systems. Evidence obtained without a search warrant is not admissible in federal court, so it should not be admissible in state courts either. After all of this discussion, the court decided that the “exclusionary rule is an essential part of both the Fourth and Fourteenth

Show More
Related

  • Case Study Of Dollree Mapp's Home In Cleveland

    233 Words  | 1 Pages

    This case happened on June 19, 1961. The case was about police breaking into Dollree Mapp 's home in Cleveland, Ohio without a proper search warrant. There had been information given that a suspect in a bombing case, as well as some illegal bombing equipment might be found at her home. With this information police decided to go to the house and ask permission to enter, when Mapp refused to let them in, three hours later two of the officers came back with more officers holding a piece of paper, they broke down the door. Police found nothing when they raided the house besides a suitcase full of pornographic material.

    Read More

  • Commonwealth V. Newman Case Study

    157 Words  | 1 Pages

    In Commonwealth v. Newman, 429 PA. 441 (1968), on November 16, 1964, at about 11:30 a.m. four detectives went to appellant 's home with a body warrant for appellant and a search warrant for the premises. The complaint for the search warrant recited that the affiant, Detective John McCrory, deposed that there was probable cause to believe that certain books, papers, and other items used for the purpose of a lottery were in the possession of Henderson Newman at or near 721 West Mary Street. They forcefully entered the appellant 's home without announcement or purpose. The court held that, the forcible entry without announcement of purpose violates the Fourth Amendment. The fruits of an illegal search are inadmissible under Mapp v. Ohio,

    Read More

  • Terry Vs Dickerson Case Study

    525 Words  | 3 Pages

    Terry v. Ohio and Minnesota v. Dickerson are two cases that had a significant impact on search and seizures conducted by law enforcement. In Terry v. Ohio, a Cleveland detective working a routine patrol encountered two strangers acting suspiciously near a store window. One would walk to the store and stare in the window and then return to talk with the other on a corner nearby. After following them, he saw them meet up with a third man. He suspected that the three men were casing the store for a robbery and ordered all three into the store.

    Read More

  • Summary Of The Supreme Court Case Of Youngstown Sheet And Tube Company

    2406 Words  | 10 Pages

    Supreme Court also ruled that any state officials that obtain evidence by the process of illegal seizure or searches may not admit the evidence into criminal trials. The Fourth Amendment protects the rights of citizens from unreasonable seizures and searches (Pearson Education). This decision by the U.S. Supreme Court enforces the exclusionary rule of search and seizures to the all levels of the government and limits the powers that police officers have over citizens by protecting their Fourth Amendment rights (Oyez Project). This case and the decision of the U.S. Supreme Court has redefined the rights of citizens accused of crimes. The decision is controversial because it makes it difficult to determine when or how the exclusionary rule is applied.

    Read More

  • Summary: The Case Of Freemont Weeks V. United States

    1396 Words  | 6 Pages

    In June 1968 the United States Supreme Court affirmed that the conviction allows police officers to interrogate and frisk suspicious individuals.(Chief Justice Warren) Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1

    Read More

  • Shirley Kinge Accused Of Helping Her Son Burn Down A House

    258 Words  | 2 Pages

    Shirley Kinge was a 54 year old mother who was accused of helping her son burn down a house. In the house, a couple and their two children were found with pillowcases on their heads with gunshots to the back of their heads. Her son Michael Kinge killed the family and then set the house on fire. There was a tip that he was the one who committed the crime and when the police showed up to arrest him, he proceeded into firing at the cops. He was killed in the gunfire.

    Read More

  • Oklahoma City Bombing Case Study

    674 Words  | 3 Pages

    Forensic science in this case played a significant role for capturing these three suspects and the conviction of all three suspects. However, the authorities never stated if the bomb was military type bomb or a homemade bomb. Timothy was in the Army and was very experienced in this field but Nichols assisted with building the bomb according to the Federal Bureau of Investigation. Why wasn’t Nichols disclosed like Timothy’s, and why Fortier’s background wasn’t disclosed to the public (fbi.gov,

    Read More

  • Terry V. Ohio Case Study

    1525 Words  | 7 Pages

    Detective mcfadden had no legal reason to believe that the men had anything to do with the bank robbery besides the fact that they man have looked out of place. Detective mcfadden had violated the 4th amendment from my perspective and should have been held responsible for

    Read More

  • The Case Of Booth Vs. The State Of Maryland

    500 Words  | 2 Pages

    In the case of Booth versus the state of Maryland, John Booth was convicted of murdering an elderly couple. In 1983 Booth and an accomplice brutally murdered an elderly couple, Ira and Rose Bronstein, in their home. Booth was subsequently apprehended, charged, and convicted by a jury of two counts of first degree murder. The State requested the death penalty. He chose to have the jury determine his sentence instead of the judge.

    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

  • Arguments Against The Exclusionary Rule

    676 Words  | 3 Pages

    The exclusionary rule, as applied today, states that any evidence that was found using an unconstitutional method is also unconstitutional; therefore, inadmissible in court. This is because criminal proceedings are to be fair and impartial (i.e. “reason and truth”). I agree, by allowing the exclusionary rule into proceedings, the rights of the defendants are protected. Although the defendants may be guilty, there has to be a system in which the police should also be held accountable for the way they proceed in practice. The criminal proceeding is adversarial with the ultimate goal for both sides being to let the evidence and circumstances prove the truth; therefore, the way the evidence is gather should be a critical element towards a conviction.

    Read More

  • Argumentative Essay On The Fourth Amendment

    427 Words  | 2 Pages

    The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects against unreasonable searches and seizures shall not be violated… We all know the fourth amendment. It's the amendment that guarantees our safety within our homes and our personal belongings. Yet, how much do you know about the fourth amendment? The fourth amendment is full of history, controversy, and discussion, even in modern day.

    Read More

  • Arguments Against The Exclusionary Rule

    1034 Words  | 5 Pages

    & Everett, P., 2016). This is a rule that leads me to have mixed thoughts about it. In one aspect it is a protection from the police invading the personal privacy of one's home or belongings, and the other is that because of this rule a criminal gets to be set free. I truly feel that the exclusionary rule protects those that have had their Fourth Amendment violated. Although, in the U.S. Constitution it nowhere specifies anything having to do with the exclusionary rule.

    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 The Case Of Mapp V. Ohio

Open Document