Tuesday, October 15, 2013

Mapp v. Ohio

Case Name: Mapp v. Ohio

Year: 1961

Result: 6-3, favor Mapp

Related Constitutional Issue/Amendment: Amendment IV, Search and Seizure

Civil Rights or Civil Liberties: Civil Liberties

Significance/Precedent: The Supreme Court ruled that the evidence from Mapp's house could not be used in trial because it was illegally obtained. This put new pressure on police everywhere to make sure they had a warrant and followed due process. The exclusionary rule was officially incorporated.

Quote from Majority Opinion: "Since the Fourth Amendment's right of privacy has been declared enforceable against the States through the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth, it is enforceable against them by the same sanction of exclusion as is used against the Federal Government."

Summary of the Dissent: The dissent believed that Ohio should still be able to use the evidence against Mapp in court. While they agreed that the police should have obtained a warrant, they did not think that this was cause to disregard the evidence that was obtained.
Quote: "I do not see how it can be said that a trial becomes unfair simply because a State determines that evidence may be considered by the trier of fact, regardless of how it was obtained, if it is relevant to the one issue with which the trial is concerned, the guilt or innocence of the accused."

Six-word Summary: Exclusionary rule incorporated, no illegal evidence

No comments:

Post a Comment