Read the excerpt below.

This statement makes an argument in favor of which action?

"The State, by admitting evidence unlawfully seized, serves to encourage disobedience to the Federal Constitution which it is bound to uphold."

Mapp v. Ohio (1961)

A

searching a person's house without a warrant

B

suspending the writ of habeas corpus

C

excluding illegally obtained evidence from a trial

Question

History

Annabella

20 March, 13:15

Read the excerpt below.

This statement makes an argument in favor of which action?

"The State, by admitting evidence unlawfully seized, serves to encourage disobedience to the Federal Constitution which it is bound to uphold."

Mapp v. Ohio (1961)

A

searching a person's house without a warrant

B

suspending the writ of habeas corpus

C

excluding illegally obtained evidence from a trial

+1

Answers (1)

Know the Answer?

Kian Bender · Answer 1

The correct answer is A) Searching a person's house without a warrant

The case Mapp v. Ohio is about Dollree Mapp, a woman that was convicted of possessing obscene materials after the police searched her house illegally looking for a fugitive.

The case was decided by 6-3 in favor of Dollree Mapp. In the opinion of the Supreme Court evidence that is obtained by searches and seizures that violate the 4th Amendment are inadmissible in states courts.

If this evidence is admitted in a case, it would encourage the disobedience of the Federal Constitution because then it would not be needed any legal warrant.