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. 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. 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. 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. 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. 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. 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. 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. 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. 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
