Search results
The Mapp V. Ohio case is an iconic instance of successful legal pushback against potential state overreach, becoming deeply interconnected with the Fourth Amendment and the Exclusionary Rule. Exploring this case highlights the dynamism within the U.S. legal system and its efforts to protect citizens' rights against unreasonable searches and ...
11 mar 2017 · 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 unreasonable search and seizure could not be used against the accused in criminal state court.
Mapp v. Ohio, 367 U.S. 643 (1961), was a landmark U.S. Supreme Court decision in which the Court ruled that the exclusionary rule, which prevents a prosecutor from using evidence that was obtained by violating the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, applies to states as well as the federal government.
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.
After losing an appeal to the Ohio Supreme Court, Mapp took her case to the U.S. Supreme Court. The Court determined that evidence obtained through a search that violates the Fourth Amendment is inadmissible in state courts.
13 sie 2020 · The Supreme Court's 1961 decision in Mapp v. Ohio made huge changes for the rights of those accused of a crime by deciding whether evidence gathered without a warrant was admissible in state court. Find out more on FindLaw's Supreme Court Insights.
Mapp was charged with violating Ohio state law prohibiting “lewd, lascivious, or obscene material.” She was convicted and sentenced to one to seven years in prison. Mapp appealed her conviction.
