Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Mapp v. Ohio, 367 U.S. 643 (1961), was a landmark U.S. Supreme Court decision in which the Court ruled that the exclusionary rule, which prevents a prosecutor from using evidence that was obtained by violating the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, applies to states as well as the federal government.
Mapp v. Ohio, 367 U.S. 643 (1961) — incorporated exclusionary rule against the states; Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 (1968) — stop and frisk for weapons OK for officer safety; Sibron v. New York, 392 U.S. 40 (1968) — companion case to Terry. Peters v. New York (1968) — companion case to Terry contained in Sibron
Dollree Mapp (October 30, 1923 – October 31, 2014) was the appellant in the Supreme Court case Mapp v. Ohio (1961). She argued that her right to privacy in her home, the Fourth Amendment, was violated by police officers who entered her house with what she thought to be a fake search warrant. [1]
(Overruled by Schenck v. United States (1919)) Mutual Film Corp. v. Industrial Commission of Ohio, 236 U.S. 230 (1915) Motion pictures are not entitled to free speech protection because they are a business, not a form of art. (Overruled by Joseph Burstyn, Inc. v. Wilson (1952)) Schenck v.
Landmark Cases: Historic Supreme Court Decisions is a series first aired by C-SPAN in the fall of 2015 about 12 key cases argued in front of the U.S. Supreme Court.A second season aired in the winter and spring of 2018, in which 12 additional cases were discussed. [1]
Ohio that the exclusionary rule also applies to state criminal prosecutions under the doctrine of incorporation. In Mapp , the majority gave three rationales for enforcing the exclusionary rule under the Constitution: protecting a defendant's Fourth Amendment rights, promoting judicial integrity, and deterring improper searches and seizures.
It was not until Mapp v. Ohio , 367 U.S. 643 (1961), [ 3 ] that the exclusionary rule was held to be binding on the states through the doctrine of selective incorporation.) Subsequently, the defense in many criminal trials attempted to prove that a search warrant was invalid, thus making the search illegal and hence the evidence obtained ...
Main page; Contents; Current events; Random article; About Wikipedia; Contact us; Pages for logged out editors learn more