The case began on 23 May 1957 when police officers entered the Cleveland home of Dollree Mapp looking for a person wanted for questioning in a recent bombing and seeking illegal gambling paraphernalia. 11201 Euclid Ave.

After a thorough search, the police found neither the person nor the gambling materials. The Mapp v. Ohio Decision.

44106, 10900 Euclid Ave. Argued March 29, 1961. Legal Notice | Privacy Policy, Mather House, Room 308 No search warrant was produced at the trial, nor was the failure to produce one accounted for. Application of the Fourth Amendment protection against the introduction of evidence obtained from an illegal search and seizure is applied to the states through the 14 th Amendment. The case arose when an Ohio woman, Dollree Mapp, refused to allow local police to enter her home without a warrant in their search for a suspected bombing fugitive. She appealed her conviction on the … The case began in Cleveland, Ohio, in 1957 when police demanded entry into 34-year-old Dollree Mapp's home. MR. JUSTICE CLARK delivered the opinion of the Court. Mapp's lawyer, Alexander L. Kearns, appealed to the Ohio Supreme Court on the basis that Ohio's obscenity law violated the right to privacy, and only secondarily that the conduct of the police in obtaining the evidence was unconstitutional. APPEAL FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF OHIO. OH The Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution provides: "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated ...." But from the Constitution's establishment in 1789 until the early 20th century, Americans' only legal remedies in cases where government officers violated their rights under the Fourth Amendment were private lawsuits against the officers involved, either in trespass to recover

216.368.2000 At the invitation of the Court, Cleveland attorney Bernard A. Berkman, representing the American Civil Liberties Union, also submitted a brief. The court affirmed the conviction, and despite the absence of a search warrant, also ruled that illegally seized evidence could be entered in a criminal trial. In the fall of 1958, she was tried, convicted, and sentenced to 1-7 years in the penitentiary. Mapp v. Ohio extended the exclusionary rule, which was then being applied to the federal courts, to the state courts. Mapp v. Ohio, case in which the U.S. Supreme Court on June 19, 1961, ruled (6–3) that evidence obtained in violation of the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which prohibits “unreasonable searches and seizures,” is inadmissible in state courts. MAPP V. OHIO MAPP V. OHIO, decided on 20 June 1961, was a landmark court case originating in Cleveland, in which the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that under the 4th and 14th Constitutional amendments, illegally seized evidence could not be used in a state criminal trial. Mapp v. Ohio, 367 U.S. 643 (1961) Mapp v. Ohio. 44106-7107. 236. No. The case of Mapp v. Ohio, decided by the U.S. Supreme Court on June 19, 1961, strengthened the Fourth Amendmentprotections against unreasonable searches and seizures by making it illegal for evidence obtained by law enforcement without a valid warrant to be used in criminal trials in both federal and state courts. After calling her lawyer for advice on what to do, Mapp …