Mapp V. Ohio Name: Institution: Date: The facts The police were tipped that a bombing suspect that was needed for questioning was hiding at Mapp’s. In an effort to get the suspect the police officers gained forceful entry into the defendant’s house without her consent. Consequently Mapp asked for the warrant and the police showed her a piece of paper that they claimed to be the warrant. (Kutik Lauren & Jacqueline 2011). She took the piece of paper and hid it in her dress and in return the police engaged her in a physical confrontation so that they would get the supposed warrant from her. The police however searched her house and found and held magazines and pictures that they presented as evidence in her criminal trial for violating the law of Ohio by possessing materials that were explicit. The questions presented The issues presented before the court involved her appeal. She then sought to move to the United States Supreme Court which rendered the final review (COLLINS & SUE 2010). The type of writ used to appeal is the petition writ whereby she sorts the hearing of her case by a higher court. The evidence presented was illegally obtained through the violation of the fourth amendment formed the base of the appeal application and it was ruled that the evidence could not be used in by the state courts. Case list Weeks v. the United States 232 U.S. 383 Wolf v. Colorado 338 U.S. 25 39-40 Palko v. Connecticut 302 U.S. 319 (1937) Lisenba v. California 314 U.S. 219 Work cited Kutik Lauren and Jacqueline McCloud. “Mapp v. Ohio.” (2011) COLLINS SUE CARTER. “Mapp v. Ohio.” criminal procedure and the Supreme Court: a guide to the major decisions on search and seizure privacy and individual rights (2010):39. [...]
A 3-4 page case brief on Mapp v. Ohio. Must follow the template that is attached.