Dollree Mapp was convicted of possessing obscene materials after an admittedly illegal police search of her home for a fugitive. She appealed her conviction on the basis of freedom of expression.

Mapp v. Ohio, 367 U.S. 643 (1961), was a landmark U.S. Supreme Court decision in which the Court ruled that the exclusionary rule, which prevents a prosecutor from using evidence that was obtained by violating the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, applies to states as well as the federal government.

Mapp v. Ohio: The prosecution is not allowed to present evidence that law enforcement secured during a search that was unconstitutional under the Fourth Amendment.

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.

2020年8月13日 · The Supreme Court's 1961 decision in Mapp v. Ohio made huge changes for the rights of those accused of a crime by deciding whether evidence gathered without a warrant was admissible in state court. Find out more on FindLaw's Supreme Court Insights.

2017年3月11日 · Case Summary of Mapp v. Ohio: Mapp’s home was searched absent a warrant. The search yielded the discovery of material classified as “obscene” under Ohio state law. The Supreme Court held that evidence obtained from an unreasonable search and seizure could not be used against the accused in criminal state court.

Mapp was convicted of possessing these materials, but challenged her conviction. Mapp was part of the Warren Court’s revolution in criminal procedure, whereby the Court applied provisions of the Bill of Rights to criminal defendants and made those interpretations applicable against the …