0
The decision in Mapp applied the Exclusionary Rule developed from Weeks to the states via the Fourteenth Amendment Due Process Clause.
More Information:
Weeks v. US, 232 US 383 (1914) was the case that established the "exclusionary rule," preventing evidence gathered through illegal or unreasonable search and seizure of a suspect from being used to prosecute the suspect in court. This Fourth Amendment Search and Seizure protection originally applied only to federal cases because the Supreme Court hadn't incorporated much of the Bill of Rights to the States in 1914.
In Wolf v. Colorado, 338 US 25 (1949), the Supreme Court decided the exclusionary rule didn't apply to the states, but the Warren Court reversed this stance in Mapp v. Ohio, 367 US 643 (1961), holding "All evidence obtained by searches and seizures in violation of the Federal Constitution is inadmissible in a criminal trial in a state court."
For more information, see Related Questions, below.
Wiki User
∙ 13y ago
Add your answer:
Earn +20 pts
How did Mapp v Ohio change the Constitution?
Mapp v Ohio, 367 US 643 (1961)Mapp v Ohio didn't change the Constitution, it simply incorporated the Fourth Amendment to the states, requiring them to adhere to that portion of the Bill of Rights and to follow the "exclusionary rule" established in Weeks v US, (1914).For more information, see Related Questions, below.
Who were the parties in Mapp v Ohio?
The parties in Mapp v. Ohio were Dolree "Dolly" Mapp, the petitioner/appellant, and the State of Ohio, the respondent/appellee.Case Citation:Mapp v. Ohio, 367 US 643 (1961)For more information, see Related Questions, below.
What was Dollree Mapp's ethnic heritage?
Mapp v. Ohio, 367 US 643 (1961)Dollree Mapp was African-American.To view a picture of Dollree Mapp, see Related Links, below.
Who was the defendant in the mapp v Ohio 1962 case?
The Appellant, or Petitioner, in Mapp v. Ohio was Dolree "Dolly" Mapp, a Cleveland woman convicted of possessing obscene materials after police conducted an illegal search of her home because they thought she was harboring a suspect in the bombing of legendary boxing promoter Don King's home. The Appellee, or Respondent, was the State of Ohio, which was defending a challenge of the state statute under which Mapp was convicted as being constitutionally overbroad under the First Amendment.The Fourth Amendment issue was introduced in an Amicus brief written by the ACLU, and not argued as part of the case before the Supreme Court.Case Citation:Mapp v. Ohio, 367 US 643 (1961)For more information, see Related Questions, below.
What were the results of Mapp v Ohio?
The primary result of Mapp v. Ohio, (1961) was that the US Supreme Court incorporated the Fourth Amendment to the States and applied the Exclusionary Rule originally established in Weeks v. US, (1914). The Exclusionary Rule prohibits the prosecution from using evidence obtained illegally (in this case, as the result of wrongful search and seizure) to convict the defendant.More InformationDollree Mapp won her US Supreme Court case, Mapp v. Ohio,(1961), by a vote of 6-3, and her conviction for possession of pornography was vacated, ending the seven-year prison sentence Ohio imposed in 1958.Although Mapp's attorney argued originally argued the Ohio law under which Mapp was convicted was unconstitutional because it was overbroad and infringed on her First Amendment rights, the Supreme Court ultimately decided the case on the basis of a Fourth Amendment search and seizure violation, incorporating that Amendment to the states and extending the federal "exclusionary rule" to prohibit illegally obtained evidence from being used against the defendant in court.Case Citation:Mapp v. Ohio, 367 US 643 (1961)
What was the date of the Mapp v Ohio case?
Mapp v. Ohio, 367 US 643 (1961)The case was argued on March 29, 1961. The US Supreme Court released its decision on June 19, 1961.For more information, see Related Questions, below.
What are the related cases with Mapp v Ohio?
There are no other 'related' cases. The US Supreme Court only takes one representative case for review when considering the constitutionality of a law. If, indeed, there even were other cases, ONLY the Mapp v. Ohio case was chosen.
What rationale has the US Supreme Court adopted for excluding illegally obtained evidence from criminal trials?
Mapp v. Ohio
Who were the lawyers who argued Mapp v. Ohio before the US Supreme Court?
Mapp v. Ohio, 367 US 643 (1961)Petitioner: MappAttorney: A. L. KearnsAmici: Bernard Berkman (ACLU, argued for reversal of Ohio Supreme Court decision)Respondent: State of OhioAttorney: Gertrude Bauer MahonFor more information, see Related Questions, below.
Who was the US President during Mapp v. Ohio?
Mapp v. Ohio, 367 US 643 (1961)The Court heard oral arguments for Mapp on March 29, 1961 and rendered their decision on June 19, 1961, during the first six months of President John F. Kennedy's administration.For more information, see Related Questions, below.
How does the exclusionary rule under mapp v Ohio 1961 affect the way evidence is used in court?
Yes. Although the Exclusionary Rule applied to federal cases since the decision in Weeks v. US, 232 US 383 (1914), the Supreme Court had resisted applying the rule to the states (Wolf v. Colorado, 338 US 25 (1949)) until the Warren Court held the circumstances presented in Mapp v. Ohio constituted an unacceptable Fourth Amendment infringement.Case Citation:Mapp v. Ohio, 367 US 643 (1961)For more information, see Related Questions, below.
What is the originating case after which the Mapp hearing was named?
Mapp v. Ohio was a landmark US Supreme Court case that incorporated (applied) the Fourth Amendment to the states via the Fourteenth Amendment Due Process Clause. The reasoning in the case was similar to that of its forerunner, Weeks v. US, (1914), which established the "exclusionary rule" that now binds all courts to abide by specific Fourth Amendment protections.Case Citation:Mapp v. Ohio, 367 US 643 (1961)For more information, see Related Questions, below.
