Yahoo Web Search

Search results

  1. Mapp v. Ohio, 367 U.S. 643 (1961), was a landmark decision of the U.S. Supreme Court in which the Court ruled that the exclusionary rule, which prevents prosecutors from using evidence in court that was obtained by violating the 4th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, applies not only to the federal government but also to the state governments.

    • Black
    • Dollree Mapp v. State of Ohio
    • Harlan, joined by Frankfurter, Whittaker
    • Clark, joined by Warren, Black, Douglas, Brennan
  2. Mapp v. Ohio, case in which the U.S. Supreme Court on June 19, 1961, ruled (6–3) that evidence obtained in violation of the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which prohibits “unreasonable searches and seizures,” is inadmissible in state courts. In so doing, it held that the federal exclusionary rule, which forbade the use of ...

  3. 6–3 decision for Dollree Mappmajority opinion by Tom C. Clark. In an opinion authored by Justice Tom C. Clark, the majority brushed aside First Amendment issues and declared that all evidence obtained by searches and seizures in violation of the Fourth Amendment is inadmissible in a state court. The decision launched the Court on a troubled ...

  4. People also ask

  5. Ohio, 367 U.S. 643 (1961) Mapp v. Ohio No. 236 Argued March 29, 1961 Decided June 19, 1961 367 U.S. 643 APPEAL FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF OHIO MR. JUSTICE CLARK delivered the opinion of the Court. Appellant stands convicted of knowingly having had in her possession and under her control certain lewd and lascivious books, pictures, and ...

  6. Supreme Court Case. Mapp v. Ohio (1961) 367 U.S. 643 (1961) “We hold that all evidence obtained by searches and seizures in violation of the Constitution is. . . inadmissible in a state court. . . . Were it otherwise, then . . . the assurance against unreasonable federal searches and seizures would be ‘a form of words,’ valueless and ...

  7. Mapp v. Ohio (1961) Mapp v. Ohio was a 1961 landmark Supreme Court case decided 6–3 by the Warren Court, in which it was held that Fourth Amendment’s protection against unreasonable searches and seizures applied to the states and excluded unconstitutionally obtained evidence from use in state criminal prosecutions. This decision overruled ...

  8. Mar 11, 2017 · March 11, 2017 by: Content Team. Following is the case brief for Mapp v. Ohio, United States Supreme Court, (1961) Case Summary of Mapp v. Ohio: Mapp’s home was searched absent a warrant. The search yielded the discovery of material classified as “obscene” under Ohio state law. The Supreme Court held that evidence obtained from an ...

  1. People also search for