...Unit V Case Study BCJ-2001 March 29, 2016 Introduction The exclusionary rule applies to evidence which has been confiscated in infringement of the U.S. Constitution. There have been many alterations to the exclusionary rule and its applications throughout the years. The exclusionary rule, in addition to three court cases, which have had a direct impact on the rule, will be examined in this case study. The court cases are Weeks v. United States (1914), Rochin v. California (1952), and Mapp. Ohio (1961). The Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution and how it operates is accordance to the exclusionary rule, will also be studied. Additionally, this case study will examine logical searches and how they may have pertained to the three court cases. Exclusionary Rule The exclusionary rule is an interpretation of the Fourteenth Amendment by the Supreme Court, it is not part of the U.S. Constitution (Dempsey, 2013). When written, the Bill of Rights only applied to “agents of the federal government—not to those of local governments—the Court first applied the exclusionary rule only to federal courts and federal law enforcement officers.” (Dempsey, 2013, p.179) In court cases, the rule has progressed as an interpretation of the Fourth Amendment by the Supreme Court, which forbids any irrational search and seizure of a citizen. Illegally confiscated evidence cannot be utilized against a defendant in a court, as it violates the Fourth Amendment, thus, the evidence...
Words: 1934 - Pages: 8
...Mapp v. Ohio, 367 U.S. 643 (1961) was a very important case and turning point in our nation's history. It changed our legal system by extending the evidence exclusionary rule that was originally decided in Weeks v. United States, 232 U.S. 383 (1914). It also marked the final incorporation of the fourth amendment into the due process clause of the fourteenth. The exclusionary rule was created in Weeks which prevented the federal government from using evidence that is found during an illegal search without a warrant. Years later in Wolf v Colorado, 338 U.S. 25 (1949) the Supreme Court ruled that both state and local governments must obey the fourth amendment by getting a warrant before conducting a search. The court also said the exclusionary rule did not apply to the states allowing state prosecutors to use illegally seized evidence in trial. Mapp v. Ohio gave the Supreme Court the chance to overrule Wolf and apply the exclusionary rule to the states. Mapp v. Ohio was quite the interesting case. It started on May 23, 1957, when three Cleveland police officers arrived at Dolly Mapp's home regarding information suggesting that a person wanted for questioning in connection with a bombing was hiding in the house, and upon a large amount of paraphernalia in the home (Mapp v. Ohio). The officers demanded entrance but Ms. Mapp refused entrance to the home without a search warrant after telephoning her attorney (Mapp v. Ohio). They took surveillance of the house and arrived some...
Words: 1696 - Pages: 7
...Carmen Cabresita 8/4/13 AJS/502 Mapp v. Ohio Mapp v. Ohio The Supreme Court case of Mapp v. Ohio was heard in 1961 and originated in the local courts of the State of Ohio. This case plays an important role currently in our court system because it focuses on the warrant, search and seizures, Exclusionary Rule, Due Process and the 4th Amendment. This has molded every aspect in which the police agencies and the government as to how they can retrieve any incriminating evidence from any potential offender in the United States thru our criminal justice system. Mapp v. Ohio (Plaintiff) is unique because this case challenged the Constitution and the Bill of Rights at the Supreme Court level. This case also challenged a police department because it was also able to show that at times the police officers are not meeting the criteria of which a warrant must be served on an individual. The police officers in this case had served a questionable warrant to Ms. Mapp that should have been for another individual within the same residence. The officers were attempting to incriminate MS. Mapp with evidence not pertaining to her in hopes of holding someone liable. The person in question that they were investigating no longer lived at that residence. As it turned out the warrant that was served was a bogus one, which the court, while it was conducting the trial, was unable to obtain. Evidence presented during trial was a gun and pornographic material. There were three police...
Words: 1138 - Pages: 5
...Paul Honorat Title : Mapp V. Ohio Citation: 367 U.S. 643 Facts: Three Cleveland police officers arrived at the petitioner’s residence pursuant to information that a bombing suspect was hiding out there and that paraphernalia regarding the bombing was hidden there. The officers knocked and asked to enter, but the petitioner refused to admit them without a search warrant after speaking with her attorney. The officers left and returned approximately three hours later with what purported to be a search warrant. When the petitioner failed to answer the door, the officers forcibly entered the residence. The petitioner’s attorney arrived and was not permitted to see the petitioner or to enter the residence. The petitioner demanded to see the search warrant and when presented, she grabbed it and placed it in her shirt. Police struggled with the petitioner and eventually recovered the warrant. The petitioner was then placed under arrest for being belligerent and taken to her bedroom on the second floor of the residence. The officers then conducted a widespread search of the residence wherein obscene materials were found in a trunk in the basement. The petitioner was ultimately convicted of possessing these materials. Issues: Whether evidence discovered during a search and seizure conducted in violation of the Fourth Amendment of the Constitution shall be admissible in a State court? Judgment: On May 03, 1957, police officers in a Cleveland, Ohio suburb received information...
Words: 605 - Pages: 3
...Mapp v. Ohio Synopsis Who was involved? Dollree Mapp had numerous connections to the underground world of boxing and illegal gambling. She was married to and had previous relationships with boxers and promoters who were big in the Midwest at the time. Mapp was first brought to Law Enforcement’s attention by having a potential connection to a bombing suspect named Virgil Ogletree. The police had heard from an anonymous tip that Ogletree might be hiding out within Mapp’s home. The police soon showed up, knocked, and asked if they could search the house. Mapp being somewhat aware of her rights refused entry to the police. They returned in greater numbers, forcibly entered the home, conducted a search and found Ogletree who was eventually cleared of all charges. However, the police did come across what is noted as “obscene material” which Mapp claimed was found within a footlocker of a previous tenant. The material collected being betting slips, a pistol, and some pornography. Mapp was later cleared of the charges pertaining to the betting slips located in the house but was later asked to testify against members of the illegal betting operation. Mapp refused and was later charged with possession of “lewd and lascivious books, pictures, and photographs”. She was sentenced to 7 years and immediately filed an appeal. This is where the story of Mapp v. Ohio really begins. What was argued? Mapp’s appeal argued that her 4th, 5th, and 8th amendments rights were violated....
Words: 737 - Pages: 3
...2013 Week v. United States What is the main issue or question involved in the case? Weeks v. United States was a Supreme Court case that the Court unanimously held that the warrantless seizure of items from a private residence constitutes a violation of the Fourth Amendment. On December 21, 1911 Mr. Weeks was arrested by police without a warrant, at the Union Station in K.C. Missouri, where he was employed by an express company. While he was detained other officers entered his residency without a warrant and took several possessions that were turned over to U.S Marshalls. Later that same day The U.S Marshalls returned and took additional evidence to try and convict Mr. Weeks also without a warrant. What precedent or laws did the court use in order to come to its ultimate conclusion? The case raised a question about the Fourth Amendment. What kind of protection does the 4th Amendment provide for U.S citizens? How can the evidence gained by an illegal search be used? What kind of penalty will be issued to officers who gain evidence through illegal search? Mr. Week’s lawyers argued the 4th Amendment will be meaningless unless it provides some real protection. To say that people are safe from unreasonable search and seizures have no value unless it is clear that evidence from such searches cannot be used in federal court. Federal officials should not be able to break the law in order to force the law. Drawing on the Boyd v. United States case the court suggests...
Words: 1331 - Pages: 6
...Maitri Spence-Sharpe, ADMJ 2 Sec. 8001 Citation: Mapp v. Ohio, 367 U.S. 643 (1961) Facts: Three police officers went to Miss Dollree Mapp's home looking for a person wanted for questioning regarding a bombing. They had been informed that the person was hiding in Miss Mapp's house. She did not let them in because her attorney advised her not to unless the officers had a search warrant. The police remained outside doing surveillance until more officers arrived a few hours later. At that point they tried again to get Mapp to allow them access to the house. When she did not open the door, they entered by knocking down one or more doors. They searched the premises. Mapp wanted to see a search warrant. An officer showed her a piece of paper and said it was a warrant. Mapp took the document and placed in the front of her clothing. The officers forcefully got the paper back, handcuffed her for behaving contentiously, and forced her stay in her bedroom. The police searched all the rooms and found obscene photographs and written works, but not the person they wanted to question. It was not clear exactly where the pornographic materials were found in the house, but the bedrooms, kitchen, dinette, basement, and living room were all searched. In court, there was no search warrant presented, nor explanation for the lack of one provided....
Words: 546 - Pages: 3
...Case Study William Smith Professor Leona Williams July 15, 2014 Columbia Southern University This case study paper is focused on the exclusionary rule, which is defined as an interpretation of the Fourteenth Amendment by the Supreme Court that holds evidence seized in violation of the U.S. Constitution cannot be used in court against a defendant (Dempsey, J., Forst, L., 2011). What this rule pretty much means is that any evidence that is found to be seized in violation of the U.S. Constitution can be suppressed in court and not used against the arrested subject. The exclusionary rule evolved in U.S. law through a series of Supreme Court cases. Since at least 1914, the Supreme Court has been concerned with the use of illegal means by the police to seize evidence in violation of the Constitution, and then using that evidence to convict a defendant in court (Dempsey, J., Forst, L., 2011). The court continually warned state courts and law enforcement agencies that they must amend their procedures in order to comply with the U.S. Constitution or risk the exclusionary rule being imposed on them as well. By 1961, the Supreme Court, noting that the state courts had not amended their procedures to conform to the Constitution, applied the exclusionary rule to the state courts and law enforcement agencies, as well as federal ones. The following cases Weeks vs. United States, Rochin vs. California and Mapp vs. Ohio, I will compare and contrast each individual case. I will also...
Words: 1442 - Pages: 6
...Mapp v. Ohio, 367 U.S. 643 (1961) Facts of the Case In Cleveland, Ohio, 3 members of local law enforcement arrived at a house with the purpose of executing a search that was obtained in order to search the property where a supposed bomb suspect was hiding out, at the house were the plaintiff, Mapp, and her daughter, both of whom lived on the second story of the two-family residence. According to officers, they had received information that someone was hiding in the home that was wanted for questioning in relation to a recent bombing. Upon knocking on the door and demanding entrance to search the premises, Miss Mapp denied the request. The officers informed their commanding officer of the situation at hand, and waited in a surveillance position outside of the residence. Several hours later, the officers attempted to gain entry into the house a second time after back up of an additional 4 police officers arrived at the scene. At this time Miss Mapp refused to even open the door, they then forced their way into the dwelling by physical force. Miss Mapp's attorney arrived at the residence, the officers would not allow him entrance, nor would they allow him to view the search warrant. While Miss Mapp continued questioning the officers about the warrant, an officer quickly flashed a piece of paper, at which time Miss Mapp grabbed the piece of paper and proceeded to hide it in her chest area. This caused a conflict between the officers and Miss Mapp, which eventually led to...
Words: 644 - Pages: 3
...There have been a number of landmark decisions made in the U.S. Supreme Court that effect the 4th amendment. Some of the most influential cases of all time are Weeks v. United States, Mapp v. Ohio, Terry v. Ohio, Florida v. Bostick, and Schneckloth v. Bustamonte. These cases have shaped the way law enforcement must go about apprehending certain suspects. They must now be careful when it comes to searches and seizures, and making sure to have a warrant or the owners consent before doing so. Weeks v. United States was the case that created the exclusionary rule, which barred illegally obtained evidence from being used in court. The case began when police had reason to believe that Fremont Weeks was sending lottery tickets...
Words: 2188 - Pages: 9
...Title Author Author Affiliation Abstract During the 1960’s, police officers executed arrests and dealt with problems in a way that greatly differ from law enforcement of today. This time frame involved racial riots, women rights, civil rights and important court cases. Mapp v. Ohio was concluded in 1961, and concluded that the fourth amendment applied to state courts and not just federal. Women achieved major milestones in the 1960’s, and Civil Rights were one of the biggest topics of the times. In the criminal justice field, a law enforcement official is expected to conduct themselves in a professional manner on and off duty. Part I – Policing Research Police Trends and Issues during the 1960’s During the 1960’s, law enforcement was completely different from what it is today. Officers were taught to handle situations in a way that would be illegal and in some opinions, morally wrong. When there was a riot, regardless of what is motivating the crowd, law enforcement officials would use excessive force and various, unnecessary tactics. People today probably wonder what made police officials believe that this type of crowd control was an acceptable response to any type of situation. Unfortunately, police officers were taught this in the academies and honestly believed that what they were doing was right. Also during this era, the first female officers came into play for law enforcement. In conjunction to females being allowed to be become officers, the first black police...
Words: 1704 - Pages: 7
...the constitutional right. In the Fifth Amendment the exclusionary rule states that no one shall be made in a criminal trial case to be a witness against themselves, and that nobody shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property without applying due process of law. The exclusionary rule is in the fourth amendment and is intended to protect people from searches that are illegal and seizures. To protect against self-incrimination and to protect people from prosecution from evidence gathered by the police that is very illegal and violates the Fifth Amendment. In the sixth amendment the exclusionary rule applies to the violations which make sure every citizen has the right to counsel. The exclusionary rule is used and applies to anyone who lives in the United States. “The courts finally decided on the exclusionary rule, the rule that says that evidence illegally seized may not be used as evidence, as a means of enforcement. “We’re sorry" doesn't quite cut it. The courts gave as their rationale for the rule the concept of "unclean hands." If the courts, the symbol of our highest justice, use evidence they know to be illegally obtained, they condone through their use of the evidence the illegal action and they then find themselves with "unclean hands." (Hill) In Weeks v. United States during it the exclusionary rule was brought up. In the case the court held that evidence that was taken by the police was illegally taken by police who is in violation of the fourth amendment...
Words: 1290 - Pages: 6
...McCulloch v. Maryland (1819) (1) Constitutional Question: Was the Maryland law unconstitutional towards the Bank of the United States, under Article I, Section 8, of the constitution, to tax the Bank? (2) Background information: The Bank of the United States was not chartered within the Maryland state which caused Maryland to impose a burdensome tax on the Bank. The Bank’s Baltimore branch would not pay the tax, and Maryland sued James McCulloch. James McCulloch soon appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court. The U.S. Supreme court examined the case in 1819. Once they examined the case the court ruled that the Maryland tax was unconstitutional, while the Bank of the United States was constitutional. There was questioning in Article I, Section 8, which was if the congress had the power, and it was proper and...
Words: 3306 - Pages: 14
...US/AZ Government-Pre-Test Section 1 of this examination contains 100 multiple-choice questions. Therefore, please be careful to fill in only the ovals that are preceded by numbers 1 through 100 on your answer sheet. After you have decided which of the suggested answers is best, COMPLETELY fill in the corresponding oval on the answer sheet. Give only one answer to each question. If you change an answer, be sure that the previous mark is erased completely. 1) The Preamble to the Constitution begins A) "We the People . . ." B) "Four score and seven years ago . . ." C) "When in the course of human events . . ." D) "In order to form a more perfect Union . . .” E) "These are the times that try men's souls . . .” 2) A social contract theory of government was proposed by A) Plato and Aristotle. B) Aquinas and Luther. C) Newton and the separatists. D) Locke and Hobbes. E) Plato and Luther. 3) Locke's Second Treatise on Civil Government sets out a theory of A) the divine rights of kings. B) aristocracy. C) democracy. D) republicanism. E) natural rights. 4) Indirect democracy is based on A) consensus. B) unanimity. C) the system of government used in ancient Greece. D) representation. E) "mob rule." 5) Republics are A) representative democracies. B) direct democracies. C) a hallmark of unitary governments. D) frequently found in totalitarian regimes. E) another name for states. 6) Who was the major author of the Declaration of Independence? A) George...
Words: 3950 - Pages: 16
