Free Essays on Mapp Vs. Ohio

MAPP vs. OHIO Dollree Mapp was convicted of having had in her possession, books, pictures, and photographs of pornographic material in violation of 2905.34 of Ohio’s Revised Code. The conviction was valid though, â€Å"based primarily upon the introduction in evidence of lewd and lascivious books and pictures unlawfully seized during an unlawful search of defendants home.† (caselaw) â€Å"On May 23, 1957, three police officers arrived at Miss Mapp’s residence in that city pursuant to information that a person was hiding out in the home, who was wanted for questioning in connection with a recent bombing, and that there was a large amount of policy paraphernalia being hidden in the home.† (caselaw) The officers arrived at the home and demanded entrance, but Miss Mapp refused to let them in without a search warrant. The officers then took surveillance of the house until four more officers arrived at the scene four hours later. The officers then entered threw at least one of the many doors to the house forcibly. Miss Mapp had been on her way to the door when they busted threw and she then asked to see the search warrant. One of the officers showed Miss Mapp a piece of paper that was claimed to be a warrant. Miss Mapp then grabbed the piece of paper and stuffed it down her shirt. One of the officers then grabbed her arm forcibly and retrieved the paper and placed Miss Mapp under arrest while the officers search through all of her belongings. â€Å"At trial no search warrant was produced by the prosecution, nor was the failure to produce one explained or accounted for.† (caselaw) The Ohio Supreme Court believed a â€Å"reasonable argument† could be made based on the methods of employment to obtain the evidence was justified and wasn’t unconstitutional, but the Courts explained. â€Å"The Fourth Amendment†¦put the courts of the United States and Federal officials, in the exercise of their power and authority, under limitations and res... Free Essays on Mapp Vs. Ohio Free Essays on Mapp Vs. Ohio MAPP vs. OHIO Dollree Mapp was convicted of having had in her possession, books, pictures, and photographs of pornographic material in violation of 2905.34 of Ohio’s Revised Code. The conviction was valid though, â€Å"based primarily upon the introduction in evidence of lewd and lascivious books and pictures unlawfully seized during an unlawful search of defendants home.† (caselaw) â€Å"On May 23, 1957, three police officers arrived at Miss Mapp’s residence in that city pursuant to information that a person was hiding out in the home, who was wanted for questioning in connection with a recent bombing, and that there was a large amount of policy paraphernalia being hidden in the home.† (caselaw) The officers arrived at the home and demanded entrance, but Miss Mapp refused to let them in without a search warrant. The officers then took surveillance of the house until four more officers arrived at the scene four hours later. The officers then entered threw at least one of the many doors to the house forcibly. Miss Mapp had been on her way to the door when they busted threw and she then asked to see the search warrant. One of the officers showed Miss Mapp a piece of paper that was claimed to be a warrant. Miss Mapp then grabbed the piece of paper and stuffed it down her shirt. One of the officers then grabbed her arm forcibly and retrieved the paper and placed Miss Mapp under arrest while the officers search through all of her belongings. â€Å"At trial no search warrant was produced by the prosecution, nor was the failure to produce one explained or accounted for.† (caselaw) The Ohio Supreme Court believed a â€Å"reasonable argument† could be made based on the methods of employment to obtain the evidence was justified and wasn’t unconstitutional, but the Courts explained. â€Å"The Fourth Amendment†¦put the courts of the United States and Federal officials, in the exercise of their power and authority, under limitations and res...