The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in a 5-3 vote in favor of Ohio. The high court said evidence seized unlawfully, without a search warrant, could not be used in criminal prosecutions in state courts.
Persuasive essay: In the case of Mapp vs. Ohio, Mapp deserved penalty from the law. The reason being is she was harboring pictures of illegal things she had done, a gun, paraphernalia and other items that were dangerous to herself and others. Such a dangerous person should not have rights that protect such illegal items. And the 4th amendment does not cover items that have already been confiscated. Under the 10th amendment states retain their right to run under a separate court system. Meaning the bill of rights only affects the national government, and not the state government. …show more content…
was a 14 year old female high school student. School officials searched her purse suspecting she had cigarettes. The officials discovered cigarettes, a tiny amount of marijuana, and a written list that had names of students who owed T.L.O. money. Also the officials had found a letter that appeared to imply that T.L.O. was dealing drugs. T.L.O. was charged with possession of marijuana. Because of her age, T.L.O. faced delinquency charges in Juvenile Court. The Juvenile Court denied T.L.O.’s motion to not confess and give up the evidence from the search. Her lawyer argued that the search of her purse was a violation of the Fourth Amendment. T.L.O. was found as a delinquent, and was put on probation for one year. After a long appeal process in the New Jersey court system, the Supreme Court agreed to hear the case. The issue had never reached The Supreme Court. After this the court had come to the conclusion that the searching of T.L.O.’s purse and belongings was not against The Fourth