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.
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]
However, because most of the states' rules proved to be ineffective in deterrence, the Court overruled Wolf in Mapp v. Ohio, 367 U.S. 643 (1961). That landmark case made history as the exclusionary rule enforceable against the states through the Due Process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the same extent that it applied against the ...
The Court had decided two years earlier in Mapp v.Ohio that evidence seized in the course of an illegal search was inadmissible in a criminal trial in a state court. The Court extended that holding in this case, addressing the standard for deciding what are the fruits of an illegal search in state criminal trials.
The court most recently cited Terry v. Ohio in the 2009 case of Arizona v. Johnson, in which the court unanimously ruled to further expand Terry, granting police the ability to frisk an individual in a stopped vehicle if there is reasonable suspicion to believe the individual is armed and dangerous.
"The Fourth Amendment contains no provision expressly precluding the use of evidence obtained in violation of its commands," [3] but in Weeks v. United States (1914) and Mapp v. Ohio (1961), the Supreme Court created the exclusionary rule, which generally operates to suppress – i.e. prevent the introduction at trial of – evidence obtained ...
The case, which began with opening statements on Jan. 31, will then be turned over to the jury of eight women and four men. ... Closing arguments begin in case of ex-Ohio deputy. Show comments ...
Since this comment is almost 4 years old, it probably merits no response but I will present one (briefly) anyway. This article is not a biography; it is specifically about the case Mapp v Ohio, which was decided in 1961. Events not relative to the case — particularly events which occurred eight years later — have no place here.