Mapp vs Ohio

1074 Words5 Pages
MAPP VS OHIO Issues:The search of Mapp's home was not legal and the evidence admissible under State law and criminal procedure? Why was the case heard:This case clearly overruled Wolf v. Colorado, 338 U.S. 25 (1949). The federal licenced rule now applies to the States through application of the Fourteenth Amendment of the Constitution. All illegally obtained evidence under the Fourth Amendment of the Constitution must now be excluded. Facts: Three Cleveland police officers arrived at the petitioner’s house looking for a bombing suspect hiding out in her house. the suspect was not found, but police did find pornagraphic matierials that the previous tenant had left in a trunk. The first time the police showed up they asked to come in, but Miss Mapp refused to let them in without a warrant. About three hours later they came back with what they told her was a search warrant, but was not. The police searched her residence but did not find the bombing suspect.However the police did find obscene materials in the house, and Miss Mapp was placed under arrest. Miss Mapp was found guilty and convicted for the illegal materials found in her residence. All evidence found at Miss Mapp’s residence was in violation of the fourth amendment (no unlawful search and seizures) because they did not have a real search warrant.The police, who possessed no warrant to search Mapp's property had acted unlawfully. Any incriminating evidence found during the search should, therefore, be thrown out of court and her conviction overturned. If the 4th Amendment did not limit the prerogatives of police on the local and State level, local law enforcement would have a mandate to search wherever, whenever, and whomever they pleased. The exclusionary rule that applied in federal courts should also be applied to State court proceedings.Even if the search was made without proper authority, the State

More about Mapp vs Ohio

Open Document