367 US 643, 6 L ed 2d 1081, 81 S Ct 1684.
VOTE: 6 (Black, Brennan, Clark, Douglas, Stewart, Warren).
3 (Frankfurter, Harlan, Whittaker).
Opinion of the Court: Clark.
Concurring opinions: Black, Douglas, Stewart .
Dissenting opinion: Harlan.
FACTS:.
Dollree Mapp, a woman in her early twenties, was involved in myriad illegal activities which she carried on in her Cleveland home. For several months the police had attempted to shut down her operations, but apparently Mapp was tipped off because, each time police planned a raid, she managed to elude them.
On 23 May 1957, police officers, led by Sgt. Carl Delau, tried to enter Mapp's house, this time on the grounds that she was harboring a fugitive from justice. (The fugitive she was harboring was suspected of bombing the house of an alleged Cleveland numbers racketeer, Don King, who was later to become a prominent boxing promoter.) When the police arrived, Mapp refused to let them in because they did not have a search warrant. Delau returned to his car, radioed for a search warrant, and kept the house under surveillance. Three hours later, and with additional police officers, Delau again tried to enter. This time Mapp did not come to the door, so police forced it open.
At this point several events occurred almost simultaneously. Mapp's attorney, whom she had called when police first appeared, arrived and tired to see her. Police would not let him in. Hearing the police break in, Mapp came downstairs and began arguing with them. Delau held up a piece of a paper, which he claimed was a search warrant. Mapp grabbed it and stuffed it down her blouse. A fight broke out, during which police handcuffed Mapp, retrieved the paper, and searched the house. The police seized some allegedly obscene pictures, which were illegal to possess under Ohio law. The existence of a valid search warrant was never established by the state. Mapp was found guilty of possession of obscene materials and sentenced to prison.
Dollree Mapp was a resident of the state of Ohio. ... Because of this the police arrested Mapp, since having obscene material was illegal in the state of Ohio. ... Mapp's attorney appealed to the Supreme Court of Ohio. ... The previous case that was important was Wolfe v. ... The court ruled in favor of Mapp. ...
The United States Supreme Court has often played a major role in expanding constitutional liberties in the United States. There was Plessy vs. Ferguson, where Homer Adolph Plessy, who was seven-eighths Caucasian, took a seat in a "whites only" car of a Louisiana train and once he refused to move to ...
The case that sticks out the most in Warrens run as Chief was Brown v. ... During Warren's court years in the 1960's, he took on such cases as Mapp v Ohio that dealt with search and seizure, Miranda v Arizona that ended in the making of the Miranda rights, and Abbington v Schempp that dealt with the separation of church and state. Mapp v Ohio dealt with a woman whose home was illegally searched and incriminating evidence was found in her house. ... Then there was the case of Abbington v Schempp. ... The final court case example of his role in reshaping rights was the Miranda v Ari...
The definition of "unreasonable" was first dealt with at the federal level in the 1914 case of Weeks v. ... Many years later at the state level in the 1961 landmark case of Mapp v. Ohio, the U.S. ... Mapp was guilty of possessing pornographic materials and her conviction should stand. ... In Terry v. ...
These violations can stem from not been read Miranda Rights (Miranda v Arizona, 1966), an illegal search and seizure (Mapp v Ohio, 1961) or inadequate counsel (Strickland v Washington, 1984) (Samaha. 2015). ... In Powell v. ... In Mapp v Ohio 1961, evidence used to make a conviction against the defendant was obtained illegally and violated her 4th amendment rights (Samaha. 2015). ... Mapp was indeed "guilty" of breaking the law, she could not be convicted because of the illegally obtained evidence. ...
The Warren Court initiated a line of defendant's rights rulings in Supreme Court cases with the Mapp v. Ohio decision in 1961. ... Ohio. ... The result of the Miranda v. ... The case of Gideon v. ...
(Katz v. ... In the case Mapp v. Ohio 1961, police entered a Mapp's home thinking that will find evidence of illegal gambling. ... Mapp was arrested and charged with having obscene materials. ... (Katz v. ...
What is the Bill of Rights? Do they affect us today? The Bill of Rights are the first ten amendments as written by our founding fathers in 1791. Although they were written to provide rights to the citizens of the United States throughout time they have been infringed upon and taken advantage of. Pol...
The exclusionary rule was first established for federal prosecutions in the landmark case Weeks v. ... In 1961, Mapp v. Ohio was the historic case that imposed the exclusionary rule to the states and on all state and local law enforcement officers as the primary procedural law that guides their actions. ... The issue in question was presented in Ferguson v. ...