SAMPLE BRIEF
Mapp v. Ohio, 367 U.S. 643 (1961)
Cleveland police officers searched Mapp's house
against her will and without a search warrant. They found obscene materials.
Mapp was convicted of possession of obscene materials.
She appealed.
Does the Constitution require that the exclusionary
rule apply to the states?
Yes
- Other remedies for enforcing the 4th amendment
are useless; without the exclusionary rule, the 4th amendment's useless
- Other amendments (such as the 5th) have similar
rules
- Inconsistency between the states and the feds
is undesirable
- Ensuring due process is more important than ensuring
that no criminals go free
- The exclusionary rule hasn't really hampered
the feds
Dissent (Harlan,
Franklin, & Whittaker)
- It should be up to the states to choose remedies
for constitutional violations
- The 14th amendment doesn't give the Court the
power to impose the rule on states
- The purpose of excluding evidence in violation
of the 5th amendment is to ensure the evidence's validity, not to provide
remedies for violations. Therefore, 4th and 5th amendment violations should
be treated differently
Return
to "Writing Student Briefs"