Mapp v. Ohio
367 U.S. 643 · 1961-06-19
The exclusionary rule binds the states: evidence of unconstitutional search may not be used.
Edition: U. S. Reports, bound volume
Source: U. S. Reports, volume 367, at 643 (Library of Congress) · transcription: Caselaw Access Project
Voices: Mr. Justice Clark delivered the opinion of the Court. · Mr. Justice Black, concurring. · Mr. Justice Douglas, concurring. · Mr. Justice Harlan, whom Mr. Justice Frankfurter and Mr. Justice Whittaker join, dissenting.
Appellant stands convicted of knowingly having had in her possession and under her control certain lewd and lascivious books, pictures, and photographs in violation of § 2905.34 of Ohio’s Revised Code. As officially stated in the syllabus to its opinion, the Supreme Court of Ohio found that her conviction was valid though “based primarily upon the introduction in evidence of lewd and lascivious books and pictures unlawfully seized during an unlawful search of defendant’s home....” 170 Ohio St. 427-428, 166 N. E. 2d 387, 388.
On May 23,1957, three Cleveland police officers arrived at appellant’s residence in that city pursuant to information that “a person [was] hiding out in the home, who was wanted for questioning in connection with a recent bombing, and that there was a large amount of policy paraphernalia being hidden in the home.” Miss Mapp and her daughter by a former marriage lived on the top floor of the two-family dwelling. Upon their arrival at that house, the officers knocked on the door and demanded entrance but appellant, after telephoning her attorney, refused to admit them without a search warrant.…Read it in the reading room ›