One of which had a major influence on the amendment, the landmark case of "Mapp v. Ohio" in 1961. Mapp was initially convicted of the possession of pornographic materials by the County Ohio Court of Common Pleas. The conviction was later upheld by the Ohio Court of Appeals. Mapp took her case to the Supreme Court of the United States and it was determined that her Fourth Amendment right had been violated. As evidence gathered was done without a legal search warrant, it could not be used in the prosecution. However, Mapp was convicted in the lower courts; the Fourth Amendment had, in fact, been violated. The officers that came to her home did not have a warrant and unlawfully searched the home to find evidence used to convict her; this brought up the question of, what should happen with evidence that is obtained illegally? Evidence obtained illegally is not admissible in court, and information obtained from illegally obtained evidence cannot be used either because of the Fruit of the Poisonous Tree
One of which had a major influence on the amendment, the landmark case of "Mapp v. Ohio" in 1961. Mapp was initially convicted of the possession of pornographic materials by the County Ohio Court of Common Pleas. The conviction was later upheld by the Ohio Court of Appeals. Mapp took her case to the Supreme Court of the United States and it was determined that her Fourth Amendment right had been violated. As evidence gathered was done without a legal search warrant, it could not be used in the prosecution. However, Mapp was convicted in the lower courts; the Fourth Amendment had, in fact, been violated. The officers that came to her home did not have a warrant and unlawfully searched the home to find evidence used to convict her; this brought up the question of, what should happen with evidence that is obtained illegally? Evidence obtained illegally is not admissible in court, and information obtained from illegally obtained evidence cannot be used either because of the Fruit of the Poisonous Tree