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]
The Supreme Court announced its decision on July 5, 1984, with Justice Byron White filing for the 6–3 majority in favor of the United States, with Justice Harry Blackmun writing a concurring opinion. First, the exclusionary rule is designed to deter police misconduct rather than to punish magistrates and judges for their errors.
Judge Amy Coney Barrett, President Donald Trump’s nominee for the Supreme Court, has written roughly 100 opinions in more than three years on the 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.
Earlier this year, New York’s Court of Appeals (the state’s highest court) issued a decision in a case called People v. Franklin. At the heart of the case is the Sixth Amendment’s ...
In 2017, Ohio voters approved the adoption of Section 10a to Article One of the Ohio Constitution. Better known as "Marsy's Law," this section added somewhat aspirational language to the ...
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 ...
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 ...