mapp v ohio
The Mapp Vs Ohio Supreme Court Case was a turning point in our nation's history. It changed our legal system by forming the exclusionary rule, which in turn changed the way prosecution of a criminal is performed. On May 23, 1957, three Cleveland police officers arrived at Dolly Mapp’s home. They had reason to believe that paraphernalia and a fugitive of a recent bombing had been hiding out there. The officers asked if they could search the home without a search warrant, with the advice of her attorney she refused. Three hours later, four more police officers arrived to the scene. They knocked on the door but Ms. Mapp did not respond immediately. The officers then forcibly entered the home by knocking down the door and windows. Ms. Mapp demanded to see a warrant; but an officer showed her a blank piece of paper that he claimed to be a warrant. An aggravated with the situation, Ms. Mapp took the warrant and wiped her bosom with it. The officers arrested her an account she was “belligerent” and “rude”. While Ms. Mapp was in handcuffs, the police conducted an extremely though search of the house by breaking things and search through private drawers and desk. They found no evidence of a fugitive and of anything bomb . . .
I would, however, reverse the judgement in this particular case, because I am persuaded that the provision of the Ohio Revised Code, upon which the petitioner’s conviction was based, is, in the words of Justice Harlan, not “consistent with the rights of privacy and security assured against state action by the Fourteenth Amendment. Furthermore, I think that our rights can be flexible enough to help convict criminals. The justice had very important decision to make; to either protect the rights of the accused or convict criminals at all cost. “Landmark Supreme Court Rulings” 1999 http://www. ” Him and the rest of our society fell the need to convict criminals, but at the same time do not want their rights violated as they were in this case. Much of Americans feel the same as I do and this is what we want to see happen, and I think Mapp will be overturned and a new system will develop. Maybe we should not determine how one is convicted, but better yet, make proper adjustments in how the police can search the home. Justice Clack made these ideas clear in his opinion when he said “The ignoble shortcut to conviction left open to the state tends to destroy the entire system of constitutional restraints on which the liberties of the people rest. A warrant does not always cut it, people can get rid of the evidence before the warrant can be issued.
Common topics in this essay:
Ms Mapp, Justice Harlan, Ohio Exclusionary, Federal Courts, Process Clause, Justice Clack, Fourteenth Amendment, Supreme Court, Dolly Mapps, Steward Feeling, ms mapp, due process, exclusionary rule, supreme court, legal system, convict criminals, mapp vs ohio, wolf vs, mapp vs, vs colorado, search home, rights due process, wolf vs colorado, convict criminals rights, person commits crime, |
Acceptance Essays
