Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
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.
Dollree Mapp (October 30, 1923 – October 31, 2014) was the appellant in the Supreme Court case Mapp v. Ohio (1961). She argued that her right to privacy in her home, the Fourth Amendment, was violated by police officers who entered her house with what she thought to be a fake search warrant. [1]
367 U.S. 497 (1961) ripeness to challenge statute banning contraceptives: Mapp v. Ohio: Criminal procedure: 367 U.S. 643 (1961) search and seizure, exclusionary rule Marcus v. Search Warrant: 367 U.S. 717 (1961) Procedural burden on state in seizure of obscene material Hamilton v. Alabama: 368 U.S. 52 (1961)
(Overruled by Joseph Burstyn, Inc. v. Wilson (1952)) Schenck v. United States, 249 U.S. 47 (1919) Expressions in which the circumstances are intended to result in crime that poses a clear and present danger of succeeding can be punished without violating the First Amendment. (Overruled by Brandenburg v. Ohio (1969)) Abrams v.
The genesis of Iowa’s exclusionary rule was a civil case, Reifsnyder v. Lee, 44 Iowa 101 (1876).... The first application of the exclusionary rule in a criminal context occurred in the Height case, decided in 1902. Height involved a physical exam of the defendant against his will. 117 Iowa at 652, 91 N.W. at 935. This court held that the ...
The 1961 Buckeyes football season, led by Coach Woody Hayes, opened with a 7-7 tie against Texas Christian University. But Ohio State went on to win nine consecutive games, including a 50-20 ...
An Ohio federal judge dismissed the case last year, saying she had not shown the "background circumstances" to support her discrimination claim. The 6th Circuit upheld that decision last December.
It was not until Mapp v. Ohio , 367 U.S. 643 (1961), [ 3 ] that the exclusionary rule was held to be binding on the states through the doctrine of selective incorporation.) Subsequently, the defense in many criminal trials attempted to prove that a search warrant was invalid, thus making the search illegal and hence the evidence obtained ...