Mapp v. Ohio court case Assignment Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 500 words

Mapp v. Ohio court case - Assignment Example erials did not belong to her but were actually the property of a former boarder at her house she was arrested and charged with the possession of obscene materials and was indicted at the Cuyahoga County Grand Jury (Sundby, 2010). Mapp’s attorney tried in vain to have the evidence that was obtained through a warrantless search of his client’s property. After a trial lasting only a day Ms. Mapp was found guilty and sentenced to 7 years. After appeals that went through the Eighth District Court of Appeals of Ohio, Supreme Court of Ohio and eventually the Supreme Court of the United States, her conviction was overturned. The impact of this case has been felt in the increasing use of the Suppression Hearing especially in cases that touch on the Fourth Amendment (Sundby, 2010). The main thrust of the case rested on whether evidence that was obtained in violation of the citizen’s Fourth Amendment which protects citizens from unreasonable searches and seizures and specifically sets out the requirements for search warrants that must be based on probable cause (Davies, 2007). The exclusionary rule, which was enforced by the Supreme Court in overturning the conviction of Mapp, basically stated that this evidence that was obtained in this was should never have been used in the first place. This rule, it was emphasized by the Supreme Court, is an essential part of the Fourth Amendment. Secondly, the lower courts had gone against the Fourteenth Amendment by denying Ms. Mapp her rights to Due Process. This case also brought into sharp focus the issue of officer misconduct which had for long been swept under the rug, with police indiscretions being seen as just â€Å"part of the job† and not an aberration of citizen’s rights (Davies, 2007). The evidence that was gained by the police was totally illegal since it was obtained without a proper warrant as specified in the Fourth Amendment. It was therefore illegal and should never have been used to convict Ms. Mapp (Bloom &