enow.com Web Search

Search results

  1. Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
  2. Mapp v. Ohio - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mapp_v._Ohio

    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.

  3. Dollree Mapp - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dollree_Mapp

    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 ]

  4. List of Terry stop case law - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Terry_stop_case_law

    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

  5. List of landmark court decisions in the United States - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_landmark_court...

    New York State Rifle & Pistol Association, Inc. v. Bruen, 597 U.S. 1 (2022) The Second Amendment protects an individual's right to carry a handgun for self-defense in public, outside the home; firearms regulations challenged on constitutional grounds must be evaluated against the "history and tradition" of such laws in the U.S. United States v.

  6. Talk:Mapp v. Ohio - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Mapp_v._Ohio

    It was the other charge, the one on which Mapp was tried and convicted, which Mapp appealed to the Ohio Supreme Court and then to the Supreme Court of the United States, which was "knowingly having had in her possession and under her control certain lewd and lascivious books, pictures, and photographs in violation of 2905.34 of Ohio's Revised ...

  7. Aguilar–Spinelli test - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aguilar–Spinelli_test

    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 ...

  8. List of United States Supreme Court cases by the Warren Court

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States...

    Silver v. New York Stock Exchange: 373 U.S. 341 (1963) duty of self-regulation imposed upon the New York Stock Exchange by the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 did not exempt it from the antitrust laws: Ker v. California: 374 U.S. 23 (1963) incorporation of the Fourth Amendment protections against unreasonable search & seizure against the states

  9. Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Humanities/2007 May 13

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reference_desk/...

    Mapp v. Ohio was clearly a criminal case. It was an appeal from a criminal conviction, on direct appeal from the Supreme Court of Ohio. The case was within the U.S. Supreme Court's appellate jurisdiction because application of a provision of the Constitution of the United States was involved. Newyorkbrad 23:28, 13 May 2007 (UTC)