Mapp v Ohio June 19,1961 Issue: Whether evidence discovered during a search and seizure conducted in violation of the Fourth Amendment of the Constitution shall be admissible in a State court By: Samantha Swingewood, Chelsea Klineman, Rachel Maclaren
Police officers in Cleveland, Ohio forced their way into Dollree Mapp’s house without a proper search warrant. Police believed that Mapp was harboring a suspected bomber and demanded entry, however no suspect was found, but police discovered a trunk of obscene pictures in Mapp’s basements
we are the police and have a search warrant to enter
Mapp was arrested for possessing that pictures, and convicted in an Ohio Court, she argued that her fourth amendment rights had been violated by the search, and eventually took her appeal to the United States Supreme Court
you are under the arrest for illegal obscene images
You have the right to remain silent. Anything you say can and will be used against you in a court of law. You have the right to an attorney
Hearing the case on appeal, the Ohio Supreme Court recognized the unlawfulness of the search but upheld the conviction on the grounds of Wolf (decision in which recognized the right to privacy as “incorporated” but not the federal exclusionary rule) which had established that the states were not required to abide by the exclusionary rule.
this incident took place on May 23, 1957 in Cleveland, Ohio
What did the lower courts agree upon?
Based on the Ohio Courts, they ruled this unlawful upon the search of the house
When Mapp went to the SCOTUS on June 19,1961, the Supreme Court ruled a 5-3 vote in favor of Mapp. The high court said evidence seized unlawfully, without a search warrant, could not be used in criminal prosecutions in state courts
The final verdict of the case is 5-3 in favor of Mapp
In order to understand the ruling, the majority opinion was delivered by Justice Clark who pointed out that the 4th amendment's rights of privacy has been declared enforceable against the states through the due process clause of the 14th, it is enforceable against them by the same sanction of exclusion as is used against the federal government
What does the majority believe?
As I speak on behalf of the majority opinion, I believe that everyone should have the rights to the fourth amendment