...Mapp v. Ohio, 367 U.S. 643 (1961) was a very important case and turning point in our nation's history. It changed our legal system by extending the evidence exclusionary rule that was originally decided in Weeks v. United States, 232 U.S. 383 (1914). It also marked the final incorporation of the fourth amendment into the due process clause of the fourteenth. The exclusionary rule was created in Weeks which prevented the federal government from using evidence that is found during an illegal search without a warrant. Years later in Wolf v Colorado, 338 U.S. 25 (1949) the Supreme Court ruled that both state and local governments must obey the fourth amendment by getting a warrant before conducting a search. The court also said the exclusionary rule did not apply to the states allowing state prosecutors to use illegally seized evidence in trial. Mapp v. Ohio gave the Supreme Court the chance to overrule Wolf and apply the exclusionary rule to the states. Mapp v. Ohio was quite the interesting case. It started on May 23, 1957, when three Cleveland police officers arrived at Dolly Mapp's home regarding information suggesting that a person wanted for questioning in connection with a bombing was hiding in the house, and upon a large amount of paraphernalia in the home (Mapp v. Ohio). The officers demanded entrance but Ms. Mapp refused entrance to the home without a search warrant after telephoning her attorney (Mapp v. Ohio). They took surveillance of the house and arrived some...
Words: 1696 - Pages: 7
...Unit V Case Study BCJ-2001 March 29, 2016 Introduction The exclusionary rule applies to evidence which has been confiscated in infringement of the U.S. Constitution. There have been many alterations to the exclusionary rule and its applications throughout the years. The exclusionary rule, in addition to three court cases, which have had a direct impact on the rule, will be examined in this case study. The court cases are Weeks v. United States (1914), Rochin v. California (1952), and Mapp. Ohio (1961). The Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution and how it operates is accordance to the exclusionary rule, will also be studied. Additionally, this case study will examine logical searches and how they may have pertained to the three court cases. Exclusionary Rule The exclusionary rule is an interpretation of the Fourteenth Amendment by the Supreme Court, it is not part of the U.S. Constitution (Dempsey, 2013). When written, the Bill of Rights only applied to “agents of the federal government—not to those of local governments—the Court first applied the exclusionary rule only to federal courts and federal law enforcement officers.” (Dempsey, 2013, p.179) In court cases, the rule has progressed as an interpretation of the Fourth Amendment by the Supreme Court, which forbids any irrational search and seizure of a citizen. Illegally confiscated evidence cannot be utilized against a defendant in a court, as it violates the Fourth Amendment, thus, the evidence...
Words: 1934 - Pages: 8
...Carmen Cabresita 8/4/13 AJS/502 Mapp v. Ohio Mapp v. Ohio The Supreme Court case of Mapp v. Ohio was heard in 1961 and originated in the local courts of the State of Ohio. This case plays an important role currently in our court system because it focuses on the warrant, search and seizures, Exclusionary Rule, Due Process and the 4th Amendment. This has molded every aspect in which the police agencies and the government as to how they can retrieve any incriminating evidence from any potential offender in the United States thru our criminal justice system. Mapp v. Ohio (Plaintiff) is unique because this case challenged the Constitution and the Bill of Rights at the Supreme Court level. This case also challenged a police department because it was also able to show that at times the police officers are not meeting the criteria of which a warrant must be served on an individual. The police officers in this case had served a questionable warrant to Ms. Mapp that should have been for another individual within the same residence. The officers were attempting to incriminate MS. Mapp with evidence not pertaining to her in hopes of holding someone liable. The person in question that they were investigating no longer lived at that residence. As it turned out the warrant that was served was a bogus one, which the court, while it was conducting the trial, was unable to obtain. Evidence presented during trial was a gun and pornographic material. There were three police...
Words: 1138 - Pages: 5
...be addressing three separate cases where defendants who went before the courts stating that their constitutional rights had been violated by law enforcement. While discussing these cases separately I will discuss the main issue, what presidents and or laws the courts might have used to come to their decision, then I will identify how the court applied these laws to the facts and then I will conclude with whether or not these three cases shaped any standards of the constitutional searches and seizures in the United States. The first case that I will address is, Weeks v. United States. The issue presented in this case is the defendants belongings were taken out of his home by law enforcement officers without a warrant. The officers had broken into his home without the defendant their and removed books, papers, bonds, and so on. The defendant went before the court and petitioned them to have his property returned to him. In his petition he stated that according to sections 11 and 23 of the Missouri Constitution, and the 4th and 5th amendment were violated. The courts did order the return of the property that was not pertinent to the charges. The defendant did petition the court one more time before the trial for the rest of his property and that one was denied. In the end of this case the court unanimously ruled that the seizure of property from a private home without a warrant was indeed a violation of the Fourth Amendment. This was also the case that created the “exclusionary...
Words: 1077 - Pages: 5
...Assignment 2; Procedural Criminal Law 1. Explain to me why the Mapp v. Ohio case is as important as it relates to the 14th Amendment. In the case of Mapp v Ohio police suspected that Dollaree Mapp could be helping a suspect hide in her home from the police Cleveland, Ohio. The police knocked on Mapp’s front door insisting that Mapp let them in, due to the police not having a search warrant Mapp told the police no. several hours later the police refrained from watching Mapp’s home and forced their way into Mapp’s home waiving a warrant as they entered. During the police searches they came across a trunk containing explicit materials. Mapp was then arrested and charged with possession of explicit materials. The Fourth Amendment "put the courts of the United States and federal officials under limitations and forever secures the people of their persons, houses, papers and effects against all unreasonable searches and seizures. By including only United States and federal officials in its ruling, the Court still left open the question of whether evidence unlawfully seized could be used in a state criminal court proceeding. (Lisa Pahm) The case Wolf v. Colorado in 1949, due to the effect the Fourth Amendment was discussed for the first time on the states. If the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment united is determined,...
Words: 978 - Pages: 4
...Maitri Spence-Sharpe, ADMJ 2 Sec. 8001 Citation: Mapp v. Ohio, 367 U.S. 643 (1961) Facts: Three police officers went to Miss Dollree Mapp's home looking for a person wanted for questioning regarding a bombing. They had been informed that the person was hiding in Miss Mapp's house. She did not let them in because her attorney advised her not to unless the officers had a search warrant. The police remained outside doing surveillance until more officers arrived a few hours later. At that point they tried again to get Mapp to allow them access to the house. When she did not open the door, they entered by knocking down one or more doors. They searched the premises. Mapp wanted to see a search warrant. An officer showed her a piece of paper and said it was a warrant. Mapp took the document and placed in the front of her clothing. The officers forcefully got the paper back, handcuffed her for behaving contentiously, and forced her stay in her bedroom. The police searched all the rooms and found obscene photographs and written works, but not the person they wanted to question. It was not clear exactly where the pornographic materials were found in the house, but the bedrooms, kitchen, dinette, basement, and living room were all searched. In court, there was no search warrant presented, nor explanation for the lack of one provided....
Words: 546 - Pages: 3
... Week v. United States What is the main issue or question involved in the case? Weeks v. United States was a Supreme Court case that the Court unanimously held that the warrantless seizure of items from a private residence constitutes a violation of the Fourth Amendment. On December 21, 1911 Mr. Weeks was arrested by police without a warrant, at the Union Station in K.C. Missouri, where he was employed by an express company. While he was detained other officers entered his residency without a warrant and took several possessions that were turned over to U.S Marshalls. Later that same day The U.S Marshalls returned and took additional evidence to try and convict Mr. Weeks also without a warrant. What precedent or laws did the court use in order to come to its ultimate conclusion? The case raised a question about the Fourth Amendment. What kind of protection does the 4th Amendment provide for U.S citizens? How can the evidence gained by an illegal search be used? What kind of penalty will be issued to officers who gain evidence through illegal search? Mr. Week’s lawyers argued the 4th Amendment will be meaningless unless it provides some real protection. To say that people are safe from unreasonable search and seizures have no value unless it is clear that evidence from such searches cannot be used in federal court. Federal officials should not be able to break the law in order to force the law. Drawing on the Boyd v. United States case the court suggests...
Words: 1331 - Pages: 6
...Running head: WARREN VERSUS REHNQUIST COURTS Warren versus Rehnquist Courts Michael Walker Park University Abstract The criminal justice system is greatly shaped by the civil rights safeguarded under the Bill of Rights. The court jurisprudence with regard to national security and civil liberties largely revolves around the provisions of the Bill of Rights (Baker, 2003). This paper discusses Chief Justices Earl Warren and William Rehnquist’s significant decisions and the effects they had on the balance between social order maintenance and individual liberties. Warren versus Rehnquist Courts Earl Warren held the position of Chief Justice between 1953 and 1969. He led a liberal majority, who utilized the judicial authority to consternate their conservative opponents. The Warren Court promoted the federal power, judicial power, civil liberties, and civil rights in a dramatic fashion. The Rehnquist Court, on the other hand, took a conservative approach in criminal justice (Pollak, 1979). The most significant case that the Warren Court decided with regard to civil liberties was Brown v Board of Education of Copeka, Kansas (1954). The court unanimously ruled that there is no place for the doctrine of separate but equal doctrine in the sphere of public education. The Warren Court demonstrated its value for liberalism and activism. The view of the Warren Court was that states are a hindrance in the enhancement of a just nation. In the sphere of criminal procedure and...
Words: 2153 - Pages: 9
...civil rights cases, as a protection of those being discriminated. Plessy v. Ferguson (1896) is one of those cases, bringing the topic of “separate but equal” at hand. Later on, the fourteenth amendment was brought up in the decision of desegregation, along with many other issues. Civil rights are available for the protection of citizens from discrimination of sex, race, religion, etc. These civil rights are provided by the government to protect oneself against unfair treatment. The fourteenth amendment, for example, mentions the right of citizens and equal protection of the law. On the other hand, Civil liberties are provided to give a safeguard for citizens against the government. Theses safeguards include the first amendment’s freedom of religion. With freedom of religion, the government is not allowed to influence the beliefs of a citizen. Other safeguards are basically covered under the bill of rights. I i i i i i i i i i i i...
Words: 502 - Pages: 3
...effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.” [1] The exclusionary rule excludes evidence that was collected from an illegal search from being presented to convict someone of a crime. It is asserted to reject illegitimate police behavior by not allowing unlawfully seized evidence from being allowed in court. [2] When defense lawyers use the exclusionary rule, properly, it consistently damaging the district attorney’s case. This is why the officers are constantly being reminded not to violate the rights of the accused. In the latter part of the twentieth century, the use of the exclusionary rule became confused between the costs and benefits of implementing the rule. [3] When a defendant has allegedly committed a crime, how far should the courts proceed in order to protect the rights of the accused against illegal searches and seizures? When the...
Words: 4522 - Pages: 19
...seized. However, both the U.S. Supreme Court and federal courts have specified limited exceptions to the Fourth Amendment search warrant requirement. The seven exceptions to the Fourth Amendment...
Words: 1796 - Pages: 8
...Case Study William Smith Professor Leona Williams July 15, 2014 Columbia Southern University This case study paper is focused on the exclusionary rule, which is defined as an interpretation of the Fourteenth Amendment by the Supreme Court that holds evidence seized in violation of the U.S. Constitution cannot be used in court against a defendant (Dempsey, J., Forst, L., 2011). What this rule pretty much means is that any evidence that is found to be seized in violation of the U.S. Constitution can be suppressed in court and not used against the arrested subject. The exclusionary rule evolved in U.S. law through a series of Supreme Court cases. Since at least 1914, the Supreme Court has been concerned with the use of illegal means by the police to seize evidence in violation of the Constitution, and then using that evidence to convict a defendant in court (Dempsey, J., Forst, L., 2011). The court continually warned state courts and law enforcement agencies that they must amend their procedures in order to comply with the U.S. Constitution or risk the exclusionary rule being imposed on them as well. By 1961, the Supreme Court, noting that the state courts had not amended their procedures to conform to the Constitution, applied the exclusionary rule to the state courts and law enforcement agencies, as well as federal ones. The following cases Weeks vs. United States, Rochin vs. California and Mapp vs. Ohio, I will compare and contrast each individual case. I will also...
Words: 1442 - Pages: 6
...Mapp v. Ohio Synopsis Who was involved? Dollree Mapp had numerous connections to the underground world of boxing and illegal gambling. She was married to and had previous relationships with boxers and promoters who were big in the Midwest at the time. Mapp was first brought to Law Enforcement’s attention by having a potential connection to a bombing suspect named Virgil Ogletree. The police had heard from an anonymous tip that Ogletree might be hiding out within Mapp’s home. The police soon showed up, knocked, and asked if they could search the house. Mapp being somewhat aware of her rights refused entry to the police. They returned in greater numbers, forcibly entered the home, conducted a search and found Ogletree who was eventually cleared of all charges. However, the police did come across what is noted as “obscene material” which Mapp claimed was found within a footlocker of a previous tenant. The material collected being betting slips, a pistol, and some pornography. Mapp was later cleared of the charges pertaining to the betting slips located in the house but was later asked to testify against members of the illegal betting operation. Mapp refused and was later charged with possession of “lewd and lascivious books, pictures, and photographs”. She was sentenced to 7 years and immediately filed an appeal. This is where the story of Mapp v. Ohio really begins. What was argued? Mapp’s appeal argued that her 4th, 5th, and 8th amendments rights were violated....
Words: 737 - Pages: 3
...Affiliation Exclusionary Rule is constructed on the state constitution of the United States, which requires that evidence or materials qualifying as such, obtained by the arresting or case officers in violation of a suspect's right of freedom from unwarranted searches and arrests are not admissible in the said suspect's case in court. That is; the exclusionary rule dismisses evidences that are obtained by abusing a delinquent's fourth amendment rights. The amendment is mandated to protect the citizens from illegal searches and arrests by law enforcing agencies. Per se, it can be regarded as the hallmark to the flourishing respects for the fourth amendment right in the United States. It is imperious to acknowledge that the rule was made in courts and not the conventional legislative protocols that involve statutes and members of the congress. It was a creation of the Supreme Court and, thus its application is confined within the jurisprudence of the legal system. The historical development of the exclusionary rule dates back to the 1990s. Whilst the development of the rule itself is uniquely American portent, the principle it protects and the justifications for its existence links to the vey origin of western civilization. To effusively grasp the advent of the exclusionary rule as promulgated in Boyd v. United States, it is critical to identify the theoretical foundations of law developed in Britain and America. Principally, two contradictory values can be cited as providing the...
Words: 2336 - Pages: 10
...anymore. Although America has moved far along since the new due process acts, Bush and Obama have been under constant fire for “obstruction of civil rights”. In the 1963 Supreme Court case of Gideon v. Wainwright, Clarence Earl Gideon was charged with breaking and entering with intent for petty larceny. The offense had occurred between midnight and 8:00AM when a person had broken a door, smashed cigarette machines, and stolen money out of the cash register. Based upon the single accusation of Gideon leaving the store with a bottle of wine and cash at 5:30PM, he was...
Words: 716 - Pages: 3
