The Silverthorne Lumber Company Vs. The United States?

Common everyday citizens expect themselves and others in society to obey laws. Laws are obeyed for moral, ethical and legal perspectives. Laws are enforced at the local, state and federal level by police; these police can be parallel to the laws being enforced or subsequent. For example, it is common for the Federal Bureau of Investigation to become involved in a federal case; however, a local police officer can enact his authority on an initial felony action. The United States on the surface has about 12,000 local policy agencies, 49 State Police, and over 90 federal law enforcement (Wright, 2012). There is a lot of authority proceeding over millions of U.S. Citizens, therefore constitutional policing needs to be exercised in order to support
The United States. This case was presented to the U.S. Supreme Court. During the arrest of the Silverthorne’s, the Department of Justice, along with U.S. Marshals office arrived at the Silverthorne’s company and conducted a thorough search of all property, to include books, papers and documents. In addition to the search and seizure, the Marshals made copies of the entire broadsheet evidence collected. This evidence found did reveal that the company did not pay its appropriate taxes. Similar to the Weeks’ case, these defendants claimed that the search and seizure was a violation of their constitutional rights – the Fourth
Ohio, 1957, police officers pursued a lead to the location of a suspect involved a bombing. Police Officers came to the residence of Ms. Mapp, in which they requested permission to enter her home, however, was unable to provide an immediate search warrant at the time. Mapp refused, the officers left, but did return a few hours later with a “Search Warrant”. Offices barged into the Mapp residence. The warrant provided was snatched by Mapp and shoved into her blouse. The officers ordered her to return the warrant, however, she refused. Due to the alleged insubordination of police authority, she was grabbed, twisted and then handcuffed. While Mapp was contained, officers searched her homes “up and down”, but found no evidence implicating their cause for the search in the first place – which was bomb paraphilia or suspects. During the search of the basement, the officers found obscene material in a trunk. In theory, it seems the officers by this time were looking for a cause to justify their actions thus far. Mapp was arrested for possession of pornographic material. During the trial, the Ohio Supreme Court believed a "reasonable argument" could be made that the conviction should be reversed because the `methods' employed to obtain the evidence were an offense to justice (Clark, 1961). Additionally, a search warrant was never produced by the prosecution and a failure of explanation to produce one. The court determined all the evidence