Mapp v. Ohio

Argued: March 29,1961--Decided: June 19,1961 (Cause No. 236)

Big image

1)

The case arised in Cuyahoga County formally known as The City of Cleveland, Ohio. The defendant-appellant in this case was living in a residential neighborhood in a two-family house on the second floor, having rented the first floor to another tenant. When she noticed her tenant that once lived on the first floor had moved out she decided to move his belongings to the basement for her daughter who was approximately 11 years of age could use the bedroom for herself.
Big image

2)

One day police officers of the City of Cleveand came to her house and wanted to be admitted for the purpose of making a search for a person who was wanted for questioning in a bobming. When she discovered what they were there for she wished to call her lawyer, Mr.Greene. When she phoned her lawyer he stated that if they had a search warrant, you are to permit them into the house, if for any reason they fail to procure a warrant by a magistrate there're considered trespassers therefore there're tresspaassing private property.
Big image

3)

When she refused to admit them into her house Lieutenant White handcuffed her while the police officers started to search the house. She was indicted 7 years in state prison for being a suspect of a crime. Thereafter she made a lawsuit against the City of Cleveland in regards to that of her 4th and 14th amendment had been violated. Furthermore the case was appealed all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court in which the case was decided 6-3 in favor of Mrs.Dollree. The Court overturned the conviction, and 6 justices found that the States were bound to exclude evidence seized in violation of the 4th Amendment
Big image

Questions

1) Were the confiscated materials protected by the First Amendment?

2) Was the defendant's 4th amendment violated?

Big image

Arguments from both sides

Defendant (Mrs. Dollree)


- She was deprived from her 4th amendment which prohibits unreasonable search and seizures and sets out requirements for search warrant based on probable cause as determined by a neutral judge or magistrate and also her 14th admendment which mentiones the equal protection of the laws for everyone.


-The defendant argued that the police illegally obtained evidence because they did'nt have a valid warrant.


-They filed a motion to suppress which request for the judge's permission to rule whether or not the evidence should be permitted during trial due to the exclusionary rule which states, evidence that was obtained illegaly shall not be heard before the court.


Plaintiff (The State of Ohio)


- Under state statue she was committing a felony by, "knowingly having in her possession obscure literature."

Big image