Mapp v. Ohio Fourth Amendment Case Essay - 1284 Words

Mapp v. Ohio: Controversy of the Fourth Amendment Ms. Dollree Mapp and her daughter lived in Cleveland, Ohio. After receiving information that an individual wanted in connection with a recent bombing was hiding in Mapps house, the Cleveland police knocked on her door and demanded entrance. Mapp called her attorney and subsequently refused to let the police in when they failed to produce a search warrant. After several hours of surveillance and the arrival of more officers, the police again sought entrance to the house. Although Mapp did not allow them to enter, they gained access by forcibly opening at least one door. Once the police were inside the house, Mapp confronted them and demanded to see their warrant. One of the officers held†¦show more content†¦Her attorney argued that she should never have been brought to trial because the material evidence resulted from an illegal, warrant less search. Because the search was unlawful, he maintained that the evidence was illegally obtained and must also be excluded. In its ruli ng, the Supreme Court of Ohio recognized that ?a reasonable argument? could be made that the conviction should be reversed ?because the ?methods? employed to obtain the evidence?were such as to offend a sense of justice.? But the court also stated that the materials were admissible evidence. The Court explained its ruling by differentiating between evidence that was peacefully seized from an inanimate object, such as a trunk, rather than forcibly seized from an individual. Based on this decision, Mapps appeal was denied and her conviction was upheld. Mapp appealed again to the Supreme Court of the United States in 1961. The case basically came down to this fundamental question: may evidence obtained through a search in violation of the Fourth Amendment be admissible in state criminal proceedings? The Fourth Amendment states, ?The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause?and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.? The Fourth Amendment, however, does not define when a search or seizure isShow MoreRelatedMapp V. Ohio ( 1961 )1619 Words   |  7 PagesMapp v. Ohio (1961), was a milestone case in criminal procedure, in which the United States Supreme Court decided that evidence obtained in violation of the Fourth Amendment, which protects against unreasonable searches and seizures,† which cannot be used in the law on the state level or in criminal prosecutions in state courts, and in addition, federal criminal law prosecutions in federal courts (MAPP v. OHIO. They Oyez Project at IIT Chicago-Kent College of Law.) The Supreme Court successfullyRead MoreV. Ohio : Illegal Search And Seizure1144 Words   |  5 PagesMapp v. Ohio Webster, Mapp v. Ohio: Illegal Search and Seizure Sara Webster Liberty High Liberty High School 4A Mapp v. Ohio was a historical case in which the United States Supreme Court declared that all evidence obtained in violation of the Fourth Amendment, could not be held against you in court (Landmark Cases of the U.S. Supreme Court, 2015). The exclusionary rule and selective incorporation were applied to this case. The ?exclusionary rule? which preventsRead MoreThe Supreme Court Is The Highest Court System1002 Words   |  5 Pagescontroversies under the constitution in lower courts and decided whether the case is in favor or against what is in the constitution. The supreme also has a part in checks and balances with its ability to tell the president whether his actions are constitutional or not. The supreme court hears about eighty cases per year give or take. Mapp v. Ohio was a supreme court case in 1961 dealing with a woman’s fourth amendment rights, which introduced the â€Å"exclusionary rule† at a national level; the rulingRead MoreConstitutional Policing Essay992 Words   |  4 PagesConstitutional Policing The Fourth Amendment of the Constitution states: â€Å"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable search and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched and the persons or things seized.† The Fourth Amendment is clearly broken in the case of Weeks v. United States, it was a UnitedRead MoreExclusionary Rule : The Rule889 Words   |  4 Pagesexclusionary rule to prevent the use of inappropriate behavior and violations of an individual’s rights by government officials through the use of the exclusionary rule. The exclusionary rule protects the rights of the people under the Fourth, Fifth, and Sixth Amendments, and requires evidence obtained directly or indirectly as a result of government violations cannot be used as proof of guilt in a court of law [1] The U. S. Const. amend. IV, states that the rights of the people are to be secure inRead MoreMapp Vs. Ohio State1291 Words   |  6 PagesMapp vs. Ohio State(1961) Background: In the Mapp vs Ohio state court case, the issue disputed was when the appellant Dollree Mapp was convicted of possessing â€Å"obscene† materials after an illegal police search of her home for a fugitive. During the year of 1961, Ohio police were looking for a criminal accused of a bombing and had been told that he was hiding in Dollree Mapp s house. Police acted quickly and came to her house but when she didn t answer the door, police officers forced themselvesRead MoreThe United States Supreme Court Decisions1451 Words   |  6 PagesAs a student or professional in the criminal justice field, one will undoubtedly cross paths with the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution. The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized. (U.S. Const.Read MoreThe Mapp Vs. Ohio Court Case1085 Words   |  5 Pages The Mapp vs. Ohio court case took place in Cleveland Ohio when Dollree Mapp was unlawfully convicted of a felony. On May 23, 1957 at 1:00 P.M., Police appeared at the door of Dollree, who was currently living with her daughter from a previous marriage, and demanded entrance. They believed that she was housing a bombing suspect within her home and that she was part of a gambling crew. Due to the 4th amendment â€Å"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, againstRead MoreThe Trial No Search Warrant1049 Words   |  5 PagesFacts of the C ase: Mapp was arrested for possessing obscene pictures, after police illegally obtained them. At the time Ohio had a statute that made the possession of obscene literature criminal. At Mapp’s trial no search warrant was admitted into evidence, however she was still convicted. The Court citing Wolf vs Colorado found that evidence obtained from an unlawful search and seizure is admissible in criminal prosecution. On appeal, the Supreme Court of the United States reversed the judgmentRead MoreThe Rights Of The American Revolution1015 Words   |  5 Pagesnot exist. (Levy, 1999). The Bill of Rights was introduced and ratified in 1791, it contains the first ten amendments to the United States Constitution. The Bill of Rights define and interpret constitutional rights and protections that are guaranteed under the US Constitution. The Fourth Amendment to the Constitution addresses search and seizure statues, it states ... â€Å"Amendment IV The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches