Skip to main content icon/video/no-internet

The decision of the U.S. Supreme Court in Mapp v. Ohio in 1961 is one of the seminal decisions in criminal procedure and race relations in American criminal justice. Mapp v. Ohio was decided during the tenure of the Warren Court, which in 1954 inaugurated the era of judicial recognition of civil rights with its decision in Brown v. Board of Education. In its decision in Mapp v. Ohio, the Supreme Court extended the existing rule that evidence obtained through an illegal search was inadmissible in federal courts, holding that such evidence was also inadmissible in state courts. Thus, the decision of Mapp v. Ohio extended to state law enforcement the existing protection of the Fourth Amendment in federal law enforcement. From the perspective of race relations, Mapp v. Ohio placed the nation on notice that, in the context of criminal procedure, the same standards applied at the federal level would apply throughout the nation. A continuation of the Warren Court's legacy of breathing life into the Bill of Rights, Mapp marked the beginning of a decade that brought great advances in civil rights for African Americans and other minorities, not only in the courts but also through legislation such as the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

The Facts

Dollree Mapp was an African American woman residing in Cleveland, Ohio. Based on an anonymous tip, the police went to Mapp's residence to look for a person suspected of being involved in a bombing incident and for gambling paraphernalia. The police produced a paper that was alleged to be a warrant but was not. Mapp refused to allow the search. The police broke into Mapp's residence, forcibly seized and handcuffed her, and proceeded to search her residence. The search included the bedrooms and the cellar and a search of the furniture, closets, luggage, and a trunk. The police also searched her personal papers and her photo album. During the search, the police found pornographic material, which was illegal under Ohio law. Mapp was arrested and brought to trial. No search warrant was produced in court. She was convicted. Her case was appealed to the Ohio Supreme Court, which found that it was proper to admit the pornographic material into evidence, even though the search was unlawful, and upheld her conviction. Mapp then appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court.

The major issue on appeal was the issue of pornography and the First and Fourteenth Amendments. Although the issue of the warrantless search was a secondary issue, the decision of Mapp v. Ohio is renowned to this day for the basic principles of law it established concerning the Fourth Amendment and for the revolution in criminal procedure it started.

The Legal Background

The Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution states, “The right of the people to be secure in their persons, homes, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause.…” The Constitution did not provide a remedy for violations of the Fourth Amendment by the government. Therefore, the U.S. Supreme Court created a remedy, now referred to as the “exclusionary rule,” that prohibits the introduction of illegally seized evidence in a criminal proceeding. The Supreme Court first enunciated the rule in Sleeks v. United States (1914). The exclusionary rule mandates that illegally seized evidence is inadmissible in a criminal proceeding. In affirming the rule in Silverthorne Lumber Company v. United States (1920), Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr., recognized that without the exclusionary rule, the protections of the Fourth Amendment would become just a “mere form of words.” However, before Mapp v. Ohio, the U. S. Supreme Court had held, in Wolf v. Colorado in 1949, that the states could allow illegally seized evidence into evidence in a criminal proceeding. At that time, the exclusionary rule was essentially only enforced in federal courts and not in state courts.

...

  • Loading...
locked icon

Sign in to access this content

Get a 30 day FREE TRIAL

  • Watch videos from a variety of sources bringing classroom topics to life
  • Read modern, diverse business cases
  • Explore hundreds of books and reference titles

Sage Recommends

We found other relevant content for you on other Sage platforms.

Loading