THE 1970S 1969 1979
SUPREME COURT CASE ROE V WADE
|
Question
[CLICK ON ANY CHOICE TO KNOW THE RIGHT ANSWER]
|
|
|
any evidence obtained illegally could not be used in court
|
|
|
the police did not need a warrant to search your home
|
|
|
the police must read you your rights at the time of your arrest
|
|
|
you must be provided with a lawyer even if you cannot afford one.
|
Detailed explanation-1: -The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in a 5-3 vote in favor of Mapp. The high court said evidence seized unlawfully, without a search warrant, could not be used in criminal prosecutions in state courts.
Detailed explanation-2: -OHIO. MAPP V. OHIO, decided on 20 June 1961, was a landmark court case originating in Cleveland, in which the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that under the 4th and 14th Constitutional amendments, illegally seized evidence could not be used in a state criminal trial.
Detailed explanation-3: -Mapp v. Ohio was a 1961 landmark Supreme Court case decided 6–3 by the Warren Court, in which it was held that Fourth Amendment’s protection against unreasonable searches and seizures applied to the states and excluded unconstitutionally obtained evidence from use in state criminal prosecutions.
Detailed explanation-4: -Mapp was convicted of violating the law on the basis of this evidence. Hearing the case on appeal, the Ohio Supreme Court recognized the unlawfulness of the search but upheld the conviction on the grounds that Wolf had established that the states were not required to abide by the exclusionary rule.