Mapp v ohio beskytter de tiltaltes rettigheder i form af?
Mapp v. Ohio, 367 U.S. 643 (1961), var en skelsættende sag inden for strafferetsplejen, hvor USA's højesteret besluttede, at beviser, der er fremskaffet i strid med det fjerde tillæg, som beskytter mod "urimelige ransagninger og beslaglæggelser", ikke må anvendes i straffesager efter delstatslovgivningen ved delstatsdomstole, og heller ikke i straffesager efter forbundslovgivningen ved forbundsdomstole, som det tidligere havde været lov. Højesteret opnåede dette ved hjælp af et princip, der er kendt som selektiv inkorporering; i Mapp-sagen drejede det sig om inkorporering af de bestemmelser i fjerde tillæg, som fortolket af Domstolen, der kun gælder for den føderale regerings handlinger, i bestemmelsen i fjortende tillæg om retfærdig rettergang, der gælder for staternes handlinger.
Mapp v. Ohio, 367 U.S. 643 (1961), was a landmark case in criminal procedure, in which the United States Supreme Court decided that evidence obtained in violation of the Fourth Amendment, which protects against "unreasonable searches and seizures," may not be used in state law criminal prosecutions in state courts, as well as in federal criminal law prosecutions in federal courts as had previously been the law. The Supreme Court accomplished this by use of a principle known as selective incorporation; in Mapp this involved the incorporation of the provisions, as interpreted by the Court, of the Fourth Amendment which are applicable only to actions of the federal government into the Fourteenth Amendment due process clause which is applicable to actions of the states.
Mapp v. Ohio