April 12, 2009
Mapp v. Ohio
Mapp v. Ohio
367 U.S. 643
Character of Action
Mrs. Mapp was found guilty and sentenced to prison 1-7 years. Mrs. Mapp and her attorney took the case to the Supreme Court in Ohio.
Three police officers went to Dollree Mapp’s house asking permission to enter into her house, because they believed that she was hiding a fugitive in her home. When she did not allow the police officers into her home, the police officers left and came back three hours later with a search warrant. When Ms. Mapp asked the police officer if she could see the warrant, he held up a piece of paper that was believed to be a fake warrant. The police officer handcuffed Ms. Mapp for “resisting arrest”. As the police officers looked around her house, they did not find any fugitive but they did find pornographic material in a suitcase that was by Mrs. Mapp’s bed. Mrs. Mapp told the police officers that the pornographic material was not hers but that it belonged to another individual that she had loaned the suitcase too. Mrs. Mapp was arrested, found guilty and sentenced for having pornographic material. *
A. Was the issuance of the warrant by the police officer invalid in violation of the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments? YES. B. In the absence of a warrant, may a search and seizure take place in a person’s home without their consent? NO. C. Is evidence obtained, without a warrant, from voluntary submission of a third party inadmissible in a court of law in violation of the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments? NO. *
The Court held that the exclusionary rule, which prevents unconstitutionally obtained evidence from being introduced at trial, applies to states as well as to the federal government. *
Majority Opinion: (by Justice Clark)
Issue (A) --- Yes. Reasons:
i. The Fourteenth Amendment requires that a “neutral and detached...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document