Mapp v. Ohio (1961)
Definition - What does Mapp v. Ohio (1961) mean?
The case of Mapp v. Ohio (1961) arose when a police officer entered Dollree Mapp's home after claiming he had a warrant to search for someone, when in fact he did not. While inside her home, the police officer saw printed materials that he deemed to be offensive and seized them as well as arrested Mapp, who was sentenced to one to seven years in prison.
Mapp appealed on the basis that the material was not offensive, but she won on a different point: that the police officer broke the law in seizing anything without a warrant.
Justipedia explains Mapp v. Ohio (1961)
The Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution guarantees the right to due process, which is part of the gaining of a warrant after obtaining the permission of a judge who deemed that a warrant is relevant. The due process of Mapp was taken away and thus anything seized could not be used against her.
The case of Mapp v. Ohio (1961) has been used since as a precedent that determines that any seizure of evidence that was in violation of the Fourth Amendment cannot be entered into court as evidence.