A person was wanted for questioning about a recent bombing; this person was hiding in a two-family dwelling. Mapp, the owner on the top floor, refused to let the officers come in without a search warrant. After Mapp refused to immediately let the officers in they broke the door’s glass open and then unlocked and opened the door from the outside. Mapp’s attorney showed up, but the officers wouldn’t let him see his client or go inside the house. Mapp demanded the search warrant. The officer help up a paper claiming to be the warrant and Mapp put the apper in her bosom. Then the officer struggled to retrieve the paper, which he eventually recovered. Mapp was handcuffed for resisting the officer. The officer searched the entire house but all that was recovered was “lwed and lascivious book and pictures”. She was then convicted for having them in her possession.
At the trial, no search warrant was produced nor was the failure to produce one explained. Mapp appealed to the US Supreme Court for a reversal of her conviction because they searched her house illegal under the U.S. Constitution. Mapp’s lawyer was present but could have no contact with her. The officers supplied a fake search warrant. The officers attacked Mapp to get rid of the fake search warrant. They found “lewd and lascivious book and pictures” which were not related to the original reason to enter the house where the bomber was supposed to be located.
There was not enough evidence obtained in violation of the U.S. Constitution. I don’t think having those books and pictures in her possession is enough to convict her especially because they entered her home illegally. The officers entered without a search warrant and broke in and entered without a viable reason. They did enter to find a person which was related to a recent bombing but why didn’t they enter the downstairs dwelling which also could have had the hiding bomber. If the officer would have gotten a search warrant, none of these things...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document