Mapp vs. Ohio Logan Hamling And Kale Krieger Logan Hamling And Kale Krieger.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
THE FOURTH AMENDMENT Constitutional Law.
Advertisements

Landmark Supreme Court Case Integrated Government Mrs. Brahe and Mrs. Compton.
Historical Background Dollree Mapp was under suspicion for possibly hiding a person suspected in a bombing. Mapp refused to let the police in her home.
Section 10.2 The Exclusionary Rule Section 10.2 The Exclusionary Rule.
Supreme Court Decisions
Gitlow vs. New York Background Information  Gitlow v. New York was a Supreme Court decision which ruled that the Fourteenth Amendment had extended.
Supreme Court Cases. What you need to know to present your case: The background of the case – What happened? – What were both sides of the argument? Constitutional.
Law enforcement officers conduct searches every day in an effort to find evidence that can be seized and used in court to prosecute people who have violated.
New Jersey v. T.L.O (1985) David Kumar. Table of Contents Background Progression Through Courts Constitutional Issues Supreme Court Ruling.
Landmark Supreme Court Cases: Mr. Blough Academic Civics.
LANDMARK SUPREME COURT CASES
Student Rights: What rights do students have once inside the schoolhouse door? Tinker v. Des Moines and New Jersey v. T.L.O.
Mapp v Ohio By: Gavin Koonts 10/27/13 Block 2. Mapp v Ohio  Dollree Mapp v State of Ohio  Argued: March 29, 1961  Decided: June 19, 1961.
Street Law Fourth Amendment Rights
California vs. Acevedo By: Caroline Correa & Raul Perez.
MAPP V. OHIO Rachel Simmons. Background & Freedom at Issue  The 4 th and 14 th Amendments  With reasonable suspicion of a bomb at the house, the police.
The Rights of Individuals Analyze court cases that demonstrate how the U.S. constitution and the bill of rights protect the rights of individuals.
Landmark Supreme Court Cases: Mr. Blough Academic Civics.
Policing Legal Aspects Go to this Site. Due Process Most Due Process requirements are in either: –evidence and investigation –arrest –interrogation All.
New Jersey v. T.L.O By Luke Wills and Caroline Weschler.
1. Supreme Court Cases Pt. 3.   SWBAT evaluate the ways the the Supreme Court has dealt with many controversial issues and analyze their impact on American.
The 4 th Amendment Chapter The 4 th Amendment Prevents Writs of Assistance Blanket Search warrants “The right of people…against unreasonable search.
New Jersey vs TLO By Sarah Shelleh.
Mapp vs. Ohio B. The Court decided that the Exclusionary Rule, excluding evidence taken illegally from a search, is not admissible in court. EXPANDS our.
Katz v United States (1967) By Timothy Vo. Constitutional Issue Violation of fourth amendment Litigants Katz, United states Fourth amendment protect people.
“The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated;
New Jersey v. TLO Unit 4 Lesson 10.
Mapp v. Ohio (1961).
Rights of Criminal Defendants
The 4 th amendment. The 4 th amendment prohibits unreasonable searches and seizures and requires any warrant to be judicially sanctioned and supported.
New Jersey vs. T.L.O. (1985) By Shaquille Stanley Victor Baquerizo.
KAPLAN UNIVERSITY Josephine Kerr Constitutional Law February 3, :00 p.m.
Mapp v. Ohio (1961) FACTS OF THE CASE: On May 23, 1957, police officers in near Cleveland, Ohio received information that a suspect in a bombing case,
4 th Amendment Timothy Bian, Myris Kramsch, Mazen Elhosseiny, Daniel Alday, John Scott, Kartik Raju.
The Warren Court ( ). Wordsplash Create one sentence per term using some clue words from below. DUE PROCESS Lawlegal principles No citizen may.
How have the decisions of the Supreme Court protected people accused of crimes? What rights are accused people guaranteed? Landmark Supreme Court Cases.
American Law and Legal Research Class One May 11, 2011 Jennifer Allison, Research Services Librarian Pepperdine Law School Library © 2011 Jennifer Allison.
By: Kerri O’Connell, Marina Reilly, and Michaela Byrne.
Bellwork: Day 5 BrainPopBrainPop: Write out the seven scenarios below and decide if they are criminal cases or civil cases. Prepare your notebook!
Eliseo Lugo III.  In Weeks v. United States, 1914, the Court ruled that evidence obtained by police illegally is not admissible in federal court—a practice.
The Warren Court (1950s-1960s) How did the Supreme Court (under the leadership of Earl Warren) expand the rights of individuals?
U.S. Supreme Court Cases Makayla Putman, Matthew Esken, Megan Rich, & Sam Fagel.
Warm-up List 5 types of laws and give an example of each.
Landmark Supreme Court Cases:
Limiting the Right of Search
Rules of Evidence.
Introduction to the Federal Court System
Mapp v. Ohio (1961) 367 U.S. 643.
By Maura Hertig, Ryan Hornickel, and Mia Lerner
Impact of Supreme Court Cases on Law Enforcement
Part of the 4th Amendment
By Michael Cleary Period 8 10/3/13 College Business Law Mr. Como
Name that tune! Raise your hand if you know how to answer BOTH of the questions below. Artist? How does this song relate to what we’re learning today?
Important Court Cases of the 20th Century
Mapp v. Ohio (1961) Dollree Mapp
Liberalism vs. Conservatism
LANDMARK SUPREME COURT CASES:
Michelle D. Rivera 7th period November 15, 2011
Evan Parkinson and Ryan Richmond
By: Arron Ferguson Ignacio Leibas
October 16, 2018 Modern Issues in the U.S. Agenda:
Shelby, AJ, Austin, Milan, Randy
4th Admendment Mapp Vs Ohio
4th amendment By: KEila Aguilar.
Identify the powers of the judicial branch
Defendants’ Rights Edgenuity Lessons 3.4 and 3.5.
4th Amendment: Search and Seizure
The Warren Court AP US History.
Do Now: a) Finish up Rights Movement Packet b) Earl Warren Background
Presentation transcript:

Mapp vs. Ohio Logan Hamling And Kale Krieger Logan Hamling And Kale Krieger

Plaintiff  Dollree Mapp

Defendant  State of Ohio.

Historical Background  The Warren Court specifically left unprecedented legacy of judicial activism pertaining to the 4th through the 8th amendment.  The Warren Court extended constitutional protections to all courts in every state using the 14th amendment.  The Warren Court specifically left unprecedented legacy of judicial activism pertaining to the 4th through the 8th amendment.  The Warren Court extended constitutional protections to all courts in every state using the 14th amendment.

Issue  Delloree Mapp was suspected of having bomb making equipment and gambling equipment. So the police went to her house and she would not let them in without a warrant so they retuned with a piece of paper. She took it and they arrested her for disorderly conduct.  While in the house the police didn’t find what they were looking for but found pornographic material and arrested her for it.  Delloree Mapp was suspected of having bomb making equipment and gambling equipment. So the police went to her house and she would not let them in without a warrant so they retuned with a piece of paper. She took it and they arrested her for disorderly conduct.  While in the house the police didn’t find what they were looking for but found pornographic material and arrested her for it.

Significance  In this case Mapp’s constitutional rights were violated.  The fourth and 14th amendments were violated.  In this case Mapp’s constitutional rights were violated.  The fourth and 14th amendments were violated.

Decision  The court ruled in favor of Mapp.  They said that due process was not given and the search was illegal.They also said that since they were looking for one thing but found something else.  The court ruled in favor of Mapp.  They said that due process was not given and the search was illegal.They also said that since they were looking for one thing but found something else.

Precedence  This case established precedence in Ker v. California  This case overruled the precedence of Wolf v. Colorado.  This case established precedence in Ker v. California  This case overruled the precedence of Wolf v. Colorado.

Impact  All searches require a warrant otherwise the evidence is dismissed as unconstitutional.

 Should the severity of the case override an illegal search warrant?  No because if law enforcement if given the power to interpret the law then the judicial branch looses its purpose and power.  Should the severity of the case override an illegal search warrant?  No because if law enforcement if given the power to interpret the law then the judicial branch looses its purpose and power.