November 10, 2012
The 4th Amendment to the Constitution was given to us for our own protection, it is a right we have to secure us against something called “unreasonable search and seizures” by the government. It limits and gives certain procedures so that the government cannot abuse their powers. The 4th Amendment makes sure that government officials do their jobs as they should, abiding by certain procedures that are describe on how government officials such as police officer’s or sheriff’s, pretty much all law enforcement can go forth with the search and seizure process (Wrightman ,Nietzel, & Fortune, 1994, p. 59-60). The 4th Amendment to the Constitution was intended to prevent bodies of the government from frightening citizens and intimidation. It thus provides that searching and seizing one’s premises must be done after the police obtain a warrant from a judge. The warrant must be legal, dated, actually signed by a judge, state the reason for the search, specify the exact location and exact address, and most off all what the police …show more content…
Mapp Appealed of course on grounds that the police obtained the evidence illegally, due to them having no warrant and therefore illegally obtaining evidence, which could not be used and admitted in court. The U.S. Supreme Court agreed with Ms. Mapp and agreed that illegally obtained evidence should be excluded from court according to the provisions of the Exclusionary Rule. Which is part of the 14th Amendment to the Constitution and was adopted in 1914, it states that “if police obtain evidence illegally, the remedy was to make such evidence inadmissible in court”. The Mapp case made the “Exclusionary Rule binding in all states, in this way it provides remedial measures to every suspect whose case may involve evidence obtained in an illegal search and seizure by police (Wrightman, Nietzel, & Fortune, 1994, p.