Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
0
Collage Businesses Law
By Christopher O’Connor
New Jersey vs. T.L.O
• Two Girls Where smoking in a bathroom in
school and was not in a smoking aloud area
• One of the gi...
New Jersey vs. T.L.O
• At the police station she committed to selling
marijuana in school
• And the New Jersey brought cha...
The Courts Choice
• That it was a a violation to the of the 4th
amendment aka… search and seizer
• They also augured that ...
Mapp vs. Ohio
• Mapp was a suspected boomer and the Ohio
PD broke in aka….. 4 th amendment broken
• Later after not being ...
Mapp vs. Ohio
• Mapp and her attorney was never shown the
warrant and was sentence to jail
• During the appeal Mapp attorn...
Mapp vs. Ohio
• Mapp then took the case to the supreme
court and the problem was if it was a violation
of the 4th amendmen...
Mapp vs. Ohio
• The US supreme court agreed to see the case
and see if it was in violation of the 4th and 14th
amendment o...
Miranda vs. Arizona
• Miranda was committed for rape of a poor
woman while in a line up
• And was then question for 2 hour...
Miranda vs. Arizona
• During the trial he had been obtain and
confessed to 20-30 years in jail on each count
• Miranda app...
Miranda vs. Arizona
• This case came down to one big question –
what is the role of the police in protecting the
right of ...
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Collage businesses law

47

Published on

0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
47
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
1
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Transcript of "Collage businesses law"

  1. 1. Collage Businesses Law By Christopher O’Connor
  2. 2. New Jersey vs. T.L.O • Two Girls Where smoking in a bathroom in school and was not in a smoking aloud area • One of the girls had confessed to doing it after being caught and the second girl did not • After that the principle searched thou the girls stuff and found a pack of cigarettes and also found a package of cigarette rolling papers and some marijuana
  3. 3. New Jersey vs. T.L.O • At the police station she committed to selling marijuana in school • And the New Jersey brought charges against the evidence
  4. 4. The Courts Choice • That it was a a violation to the of the 4th amendment aka… search and seizer • They also augured that her suppression should be suppressed • The Delinquent should be sentenced to 1 year of probation
  5. 5. Mapp vs. Ohio • Mapp was a suspected boomer and the Ohio PD broke in aka….. 4 th amendment broken • Later after not being let in showed Mapp a piece of paper not letting Mapp see it • They had searched the whole house including the basement and found pornographic books photos but still arrested Mapp
  6. 6. Mapp vs. Ohio • Mapp and her attorney was never shown the warrant and was sentence to jail • During the appeal Mapp attorney argued saying that there was never a warrant and that the search was illegal and that the evidence should not be allowed in the trial • But the court agured that it was taken peacefully without a problem from Mapp and the appeal was denied by the court and her conviction was still upheld
  7. 7. Mapp vs. Ohio • Mapp then took the case to the supreme court and the problem was if it was a violation of the 4th amendment • This was the first case that ask this kind of question • They had choosed that they could not use the evidence in court
  8. 8. Mapp vs. Ohio • The US supreme court agreed to see the case and see if it was in violation of the 4th and 14th amendment of the United States to see if the evidence obtained was in an unreasonable search and was handed down in 1961
  9. 9. Miranda vs. Arizona • Miranda was committed for rape of a poor woman while in a line up • And was then question for 2 hours by police and the police did not mention the 5th and 6th amendments • Miranda then confessed in writing to the crimes that he had committed one of being raped and said that he was ware of the self incrimination
  10. 10. Miranda vs. Arizona • During the trial he had been obtain and confessed to 20-30 years in jail on each count • Miranda appealed to the case that his confession should be out of the case because he was not aware of his rights • The Arizona denided the appeal and was upheld for conviction
  11. 11. Miranda vs. Arizona • This case came down to one big question – what is the role of the police in protecting the right of the accused as guaranteed by the 5th and 6th amendments of the United States Constitution • The United States agreed to see the case in 1966
  1. A particular slide catching your eye?

    Clipping is a handy way to collect important slides you want to go back to later.

×