The case of Mapp v. Ohio was a critical case in protecting the people's rights from law enforcement. Mrs. Mapp was accused of housing a bombing suspect, and the police wanted to search her house. When three officers arrived at her home, they knocked on the door and Mrs. Mapp denied them entrance. The police officers waited for hours until six more cops showed up to the house. When some of the officers approached the front door others found back doors and windows to cover, one of the policemen forced himself into the house and started searching. By the time all of the police officers were in the house they found Mrs. Mapp halfway down the stairs to open the door. She asked if they had a warrant and one of the officers waved a piece of paper in her face, Mrs. Mapp quickly shoved the paper into her shirt causing a police officer to handcuff her and force the paper out. When Mrs. Mapp's attorney showed up the police did not let him into the house to talk with her. While searching the house the police found explicit pictures and books, which is against Ohio law to have. The police seized the items and arrested Mrs. Mapp on scene. When the case was brought to court and the judge charged Mrs. Mapp, her attorney appealed the case saying it was against Mrs. Mapp's constitutional rights and that the police and the court had no reason to hold the evidence against her.
During the time of this case evidence obtained without a warrant was permissible in state courts but not federal courts, because of this law, Mrs. Mapp lost her case and was charged with the crime and up to seven years in jail. The police officers broke the law and gained information illegally and Mrs. Mapp knew this, her and her attorneys decided to appeal her case and try to bring it to the supreme court. Once the case got to the supreme court they argued that it went against the fourth amendment to illegally search and seize someone’s property and still have it be admissible in state courts. The judges agreed in a 6-3 vote for Mrs. Mapp.
If the supreme court did not rule in favor of Mrs. Mapp, then the police would be able to illegally search homes and people without probable cause. A police officer can pull you over and give you a ticket for speeding but they can't pull you over and search your car if you're showing no visible signs of being impaired. If the case Mapp V Ohio never happened or the ruling went the other way, then police could pull you over and charge you with a crime even if you're just innocently driving. The case of Mapp v. Ohio was a very important case in American history and is one that not many people know about.
During the time of this case evidence obtained without a warrant was permissible in state courts but not federal courts, because of this law, Mrs. Mapp lost her case and was charged with the crime and up to seven years in jail. The police officers broke the law and gained information illegally and Mrs. Mapp knew this, her and her attorneys decided to appeal her case and try to bring it to the supreme court. Once the case got to the supreme court they argued that it went against the fourth amendment to illegally search and seize someone’s property and still have it be admissible in state courts. The judges agreed in a 6-3 vote for Mrs. Mapp.
If the supreme court did not rule in favor of Mrs. Mapp, then the police would be able to illegally search homes and people without probable cause. A police officer can pull you over and give you a ticket for speeding but they can't pull you over and search your car if you're showing no visible signs of being impaired. If the case Mapp V Ohio never happened or the ruling went the other way, then police could pull you over and charge you with a crime even if you're just innocently driving. The case of Mapp v. Ohio was a very important case in American history and is one that not many people know about.
Comments
Post a Comment