Essay - Mapp v. Ohio Case Brief A. Name of Case: Mapp...


1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85
Copyright Notice

Mapp v. Ohio Case Brief

A. Name of *****: Mapp v. Ohio

B. Citation: 367 U.S. 643 (1961)

C. Year Decided: 1961

D. Character of Action: Appellant Mapp sought review of the decision of the Ohio

Supreme Court, which affirmed her conviction under Ohio Rev. Code 2905.34, for possession of lewd and lascivious books, pictures, and photographs.

E. Facts: Police officers received information that a wanted person was hiding in appellant Mapp's home, ***** three police officers demanded entrance to appellant's home. Appellant contacted her attorney and refused to admit the police to her ***** without a search warrant. The police set up surveillance of ***** home; a duplex-style build*****g with Appell*****nt's living quarters on the second floor. When more officers arrived, *****y forcibly entered appellant's home. Appellant's attorney *****, but the officers ***** to permit him to enter ***** house or to see appellant. Appellant ***** to see a ***** w*****rrant. ***** police showed her a piece of paper ***** they claimed ***** a warrant; appellant grabbed the paper and placed it in ***** bosom. The officers and appellant struggled over the paper, the ***** subdued her, and the officers handcuffed *****. The police then *****ok the Appellant upstairs to her living *****, w*****e the police executed a general search of her bedroom, her child's bedroom, the living room, the kitchen, and a dinette. This se*****rch included closed places such as suitc*****es, dresser-drawers, and a pile ***** personal *****s. The police ***** searched the basement of the building. During ***** course of the widespread search, ***** ***** disc*****ed the material supp*****ting ***** conviction; a few documents that were considered obscenity in violation of Ohio Rev. Code 2905.34. At trial, ***** State could not produce the search ***** in fact, ***** likelihood is that there was no warrant. In addition, the search was ***** to recover material linked to a recent bombing, not to uncover material ***** to obscenity.

*****. Issues: The Court was asked to determine whether admitting evidence obtained as the result ***** an illegal ***** violated the Fourth, Fifth, and Fourteenth Amendments. ***** Court was asked ***** determine ***** ***** admissibility of illegally seized ***** ***** a constitution*****l issue or a matter of evidence law. Specifically, the Court was asked to determine if the exclusionary rule established in Weeks v. United *****s applied to state-court proceedings as a ***** ***** the ***** Amendment. The Court ***** also *****ked to determine whe*****r the manner in which such evidence was obtained affected the ***** of such *****, or whether an illegal search that did not shock the conscience was somehow better than an illegal search that did ***** shock ***** conscience. Finally, the Court ***** asked ***** determine whether the ********** provisions ***** Ohio. Rev. Code 2905.34 violated the Fourteenth Amendment of the Constitution.

G. Decision: The Court reversed and remanded ***** decision of the Ohio Supreme Court. ***** Court determined that *****'s conviction was un*****ful based on ***** Fourth and Fourteenth ***** ***** ***** seizure issues. The Court

. . . . [END OF RESEARCH PAPER PREVIEW]

Download entire paper (and others like it)    |    Order a brand new, custom paper

© 2001–2017   |   Term Papers about Mapp v. Ohio Case Brief A. Name of Case: Mapp   |   Thesis Paper Example