Court Cases by Justine Costa https://padlet.com/justinecosta1/wqrecbwckrc5o4dz What constitutional right was under review? en-us 2021-09-08 16:34:48 UTC 2025-11-23 20:31:53 UTC hello@padlet.com Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District (1969) il0401 https://padlet.com/justinecosta1/wqrecbwckrc5o4dz/wish/1729182484 2021-09-09 20:43:05 UTC https://padlet.com/justinecosta1/wqrecbwckrc5o4dz/wish/1729182484 il0401 https://padlet.com/justinecosta1/wqrecbwckrc5o4dz/wish/1729186871 2021-09-09 20:46:12 UTC https://padlet.com/justinecosta1/wqrecbwckrc5o4dz/wish/1729186871 First Amendment rights of students in U.S. public schools. il0401 https://padlet.com/justinecosta1/wqrecbwckrc5o4dz/wish/1729188276 2021-09-09 20:47:16 UTC https://padlet.com/justinecosta1/wqrecbwckrc5o4dz/wish/1729188276 Verdict il0401 https://padlet.com/justinecosta1/wqrecbwckrc5o4dz/wish/1729190116  The Supreme Court ruled that the armbands were a form of symbolic speech, which is protected by the First Amendment, and therefore the school had violated the students' First Amendment rights.]]> 2021-09-09 20:48:40 UTC https://padlet.com/justinecosta1/wqrecbwckrc5o4dz/wish/1729190116 Cohen V. California https://padlet.com/justinecosta1/wqrecbwckrc5o4dz/wish/1729190403 This was a reviewing case of free speech and using profanity in public. Cohen wore a jacket that showed "F#ck the Draft".]]> 2021-09-09 20:48:53 UTC https://padlet.com/justinecosta1/wqrecbwckrc5o4dz/wish/1729190403 Verdict https://padlet.com/justinecosta1/wqrecbwckrc5o4dz/wish/1737233048 The government can not incriminate and prosecute an individual for using profane vocabulary in public places.]]> 2021-09-13 19:41:03 UTC https://padlet.com/justinecosta1/wqrecbwckrc5o4dz/wish/1737233048 wrong https://padlet.com/justinecosta1/wqrecbwckrc5o4dz/wish/1737242732 2021-09-13 19:45:08 UTC https://padlet.com/justinecosta1/wqrecbwckrc5o4dz/wish/1737242732 The Amendment under Review. km0767 https://padlet.com/justinecosta1/wqrecbwckrc5o4dz/wish/1737253882 The Amendment that was under review was the under review was the 8th Amendment (Freedom from the excessive bail, cruel and unusal punishments.) ]]> 2021-09-13 19:50:41 UTC https://padlet.com/justinecosta1/wqrecbwckrc5o4dz/wish/1737253882 Evidence Presented km0767 https://padlet.com/justinecosta1/wqrecbwckrc5o4dz/wish/1737262898 The Evidence Presented was Scientific Evidence which came from experts in psychology, sociology, public policy, law and legal practice.]]> 2021-09-13 19:55:06 UTC https://padlet.com/justinecosta1/wqrecbwckrc5o4dz/wish/1737262898 Process of Descision km0767 https://padlet.com/justinecosta1/wqrecbwckrc5o4dz/wish/1737266909 The Process of Descision was there were 4-5 options and they took in both sides arguments in their descision making process.]]> 2021-09-13 19:57:10 UTC https://padlet.com/justinecosta1/wqrecbwckrc5o4dz/wish/1737266909 as0279 https://padlet.com/justinecosta1/wqrecbwckrc5o4dz/wish/1737271114 The 1st Amendment was under review for the students to have restriction on what they say in the school papers. ]]> 2021-09-13 19:59:25 UTC https://padlet.com/justinecosta1/wqrecbwckrc5o4dz/wish/1737271114 em0633 https://padlet.com/justinecosta1/wqrecbwckrc5o4dz/wish/1737271439 This review was for Heller and the second amendment and his right to bear arms.]]> 2021-09-13 19:59:34 UTC https://padlet.com/justinecosta1/wqrecbwckrc5o4dz/wish/1737271439 Verdict km0767 https://padlet.com/justinecosta1/wqrecbwckrc5o4dz/wish/1737272691 The verdict was Its is unconstitutional to impose the death penalty for a crime committed by a child under the age of 18.]]> 2021-09-13 20:00:11 UTC https://padlet.com/justinecosta1/wqrecbwckrc5o4dz/wish/1737272691 Citations km0767 https://padlet.com/justinecosta1/wqrecbwckrc5o4dz/wish/1737279264 (Roper v. Simmons, 2004, para. 3).]]> 2021-09-13 20:03:35 UTC https://padlet.com/justinecosta1/wqrecbwckrc5o4dz/wish/1737279264 as0279 https://padlet.com/justinecosta1/wqrecbwckrc5o4dz/wish/1737282513 Verdict: Supreme Court sided with the school to restricted what is being said in school papers. 

(Ayla S., Isela C., Dana R., Dynasty H., and Dominic G.)]]> 2021-09-13 20:05:18 UTC https://padlet.com/justinecosta1/wqrecbwckrc5o4dz/wish/1737282513 il0401 https://padlet.com/justinecosta1/wqrecbwckrc5o4dz/wish/1737284243 ¨At a public school in Des Moines, Iowa, students planned to wear black armbands at school as a silent protest against the Vietnam War.¨ (Facts and Case Summary - Tinker v. Des Moines, 2020, para 1).]]> 2021-09-13 20:06:18 UTC https://padlet.com/justinecosta1/wqrecbwckrc5o4dz/wish/1737284243 Payton, Miracle, Jillian. Period 6. https://padlet.com/justinecosta1/wqrecbwckrc5o4dz/wish/1737285605 The constitutional right under review: Are police constitutionally required to inform people in custody of their rights to remain silent and to an attorney?

Yes, the Court found that the Fifth and Sixth Amendments require police to inform individuals in custody that they have a right to remain silent and to be assisted by an attorney. According to the Court, if the police fail to do so, a criminal court judge may rule that any statements made by the accused cannot be admitted as evidence during trial. 

If pulled over by a police officer, they must advise you of your constitutional rights to remain silent. Unless you attorney tells you otherwise, do not tell the police anything except your name, if the officer fails to remind you of your rights.]]> 2021-09-13 20:07:03 UTC https://padlet.com/justinecosta1/wqrecbwckrc5o4dz/wish/1737285605 The First Amendment did not protect a public school student’s right to display a banner reading “Bong Hits 4 Jesus”. am0450 https://padlet.com/justinecosta1/wqrecbwckrc5o4dz/wish/1737286180 At a school-supervised event, Joseph Frederick held up a banner with the message "Bong Hits 4 Jesus," a slang reference to marijuana smoking. Principal Deborah Morse took away the banner and suspended Frederick for ten days. ]]> 2021-09-13 20:07:22 UTC https://padlet.com/justinecosta1/wqrecbwckrc5o4dz/wish/1737286180 source: as0279 https://padlet.com/justinecosta1/wqrecbwckrc5o4dz/wish/1737287852 (hazelwood school district v. kuhlmeier, 1988, para. 1). ]]> 2021-09-13 20:08:12 UTC https://padlet.com/justinecosta1/wqrecbwckrc5o4dz/wish/1737287852 https://padlet.com/justinecosta1/wqrecbwckrc5o4dz/wish/1737293727 Student sued high school for removing articles from school papers. About teen pregnancy and divorce which I agree for the students suing them because they are silencing valuable information that could help people who are dealing with this stuff.]]> 2021-09-13 20:10:57 UTC https://padlet.com/justinecosta1/wqrecbwckrc5o4dz/wish/1737293727 Verdict am0450 https://padlet.com/justinecosta1/wqrecbwckrc5o4dz/wish/1737299590 The District Court found no constitutional violation and ruled in favor of Morse. The Court reversed the Ninth Circuit by a 5-4 vote, ruling that school officials can prohibit students from displaying messages that promote illegal drug use]]> 2021-09-13 20:14:07 UTC https://padlet.com/justinecosta1/wqrecbwckrc5o4dz/wish/1737299590 Arguement am0450 https://padlet.com/justinecosta1/wqrecbwckrc5o4dz/wish/1737303753 The court held that even if there were a violation, the principal had qualified immunity from lawsuit. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit reversed. The Ninth Circuit cited Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District , which extended First Amendment protection to student speech except where the speech would cause a disturbance. Because Frederick was punished for his message rather than for any disturbance, the Circuit Court ruled, the punishment was unconstitutional. Furthermore, the principal had no qualified immunity, because any reasonable principal would have known that Morse's actions were unlawful.]]> 2021-09-13 20:16:22 UTC https://padlet.com/justinecosta1/wqrecbwckrc5o4dz/wish/1737303753 https://padlet.com/justinecosta1/wqrecbwckrc5o4dz/wish/1737303765 (Hazelwood School District v. Kuhlmeier,1988,H.L. Hall, para. 2)]]> 2021-09-13 20:16:22 UTC https://padlet.com/justinecosta1/wqrecbwckrc5o4dz/wish/1737303765 -Cruz Sepeda https://padlet.com/justinecosta1/wqrecbwckrc5o4dz/wish/1737306439 2021-09-13 20:18:00 UTC https://padlet.com/justinecosta1/wqrecbwckrc5o4dz/wish/1737306439 The Fourteen Amendment was going to separate educational facilities are inherently unequal. https://padlet.com/justinecosta1/wqrecbwckrc5o4dz/wish/1737308137 The Brown decision is heralded as a landmark decision in Supreme Court history, overturning Plessy v. Ferguson which had created the "separate but equal" doctrine. In Plessy, The Court held that even though a Louisiana law required rail passengers to be segregated based on race, there was no violation of the Fourteenth Amendment's Equal Protection Clause so long as the accommodations at issue were "separate, but equal."]]> 2021-09-13 20:19:02 UTC https://padlet.com/justinecosta1/wqrecbwckrc5o4dz/wish/1737308137 The Great Depression cc0136 https://padlet.com/justinecosta1/wqrecbwckrc5o4dz/wish/1737308384
  • Never Use Something Just Once. 
  • Learn More Than One Trade. 
  • Make Friends With Your Neighbors. 
  • You Might Have To Get Your Hands Dirty. 
  • Don't Put All Your Eggs In One Basket. 
  • Learn The Difference Between Want And Need. 
  • Always Keep A Sharp Eye For Good Deals.
    • to have a backup plan
    ]]>     2021-09-13 20:19:11 UTC https://padlet.com/justinecosta1/wqrecbwckrc5o4dz/wish/1737308384     Citations https://padlet.com/justinecosta1/wqrecbwckrc5o4dz/wish/1737323862 (Brown v. Board of Education, 1954, para. 17)  

    ]]>     2021-09-13 20:28:02 UTC https://padlet.com/justinecosta1/wqrecbwckrc5o4dz/wish/1737323862     Brown V. Board of Education (1952-1954) jr0053 https://padlet.com/justinecosta1/wqrecbwckrc5o4dz/wish/1737327079 This was a landmark decision of the U.S. Supreme Court declaring racial segregation in public schools. The constitutional right under review was the 14th amendment. The evidence presented was the injurious effects of segregation on Black children. The supreme court ruled the separation between the children in public schools unconstitutional based on race. Segregate schools were illegal so schools had to integrate without a deadline. (Duignan, 2021, para. 2-3). ]]> 2021-09-13 20:29:53 UTC https://padlet.com/justinecosta1/wqrecbwckrc5o4dz/wish/1737327079 em0633 https://padlet.com/justinecosta1/wqrecbwckrc5o4dz/wish/1737327619 in this case, the District of Columbia had passed the Firearms Control Regulation Act (1975) in which said that police are the only ones that can carry firearms. in which Heller retorted that this was a violation of the Second Amendment.]]> 2021-09-13 20:30:12 UTC https://padlet.com/justinecosta1/wqrecbwckrc5o4dz/wish/1737327619 em0633 https://padlet.com/justinecosta1/wqrecbwckrc5o4dz/wish/1737332613 in the end Heller won because the Supreme court had a Depth analyses of the Amendment and found that it did protect the right to bear and own a firearm.]]> 2021-09-13 20:33:03 UTC https://padlet.com/justinecosta1/wqrecbwckrc5o4dz/wish/1737332613 https://padlet.com/justinecosta1/wqrecbwckrc5o4dz/wish/1737334626 I really don't believe that anyone should get the penalty since if we allow the death penalty to continue there will probably be people that were innocent yet falsely convicted that could be executed. Also a person under the age of 18 is still not an adult and a lot of the times they do not fully understand what they are doing. A lot of times Police officers will frame someone innocent of a crime that they didn't commit just so that the community feels safe and don't feel threatened that an actual killer is still on the loose. Such cases happened with Steven Avery, Central Park 5, and Clemente Aguirre. This is why I believe that the death penalty should not be available for not just people under the age of 18, but for everyone in general.]]> 2021-09-13 20:34:16 UTC https://padlet.com/justinecosta1/wqrecbwckrc5o4dz/wish/1737334626 1973 hh0083 https://padlet.com/justinecosta1/wqrecbwckrc5o4dz/wish/1737410360 2021-09-13 21:20:58 UTC https://padlet.com/justinecosta1/wqrecbwckrc5o4dz/wish/1737410360 gl0155 https://padlet.com/justinecosta1/wqrecbwckrc5o4dz/wish/1737415297 2021-09-13 21:24:15 UTC https://padlet.com/justinecosta1/wqrecbwckrc5o4dz/wish/1737415297 G. Maren, Kristin, Emiliah, Brittney gl0155 https://padlet.com/justinecosta1/wqrecbwckrc5o4dz/wish/1737417381 2021-09-13 21:25:30 UTC https://padlet.com/justinecosta1/wqrecbwckrc5o4dz/wish/1737417381 The consitutional rights under review were the fifth amendment and the sixth amendment. gl0155 https://padlet.com/justinecosta1/wqrecbwckrc5o4dz/wish/1737422776 These amendments state that a citizen has the right to remain silent and the right to a lawyer during a trial. When Miranda was arrested, he was not aware he had those rights and thought the interrogation he went under was unconstitutional, since it forced him to incriminate himself.]]> 2021-09-13 21:28:55 UTC https://padlet.com/justinecosta1/wqrecbwckrc5o4dz/wish/1737422776 lw0786 https://padlet.com/justinecosta1/wqrecbwckrc5o4dz/wish/1737428275 Safe and legal abortion is a constitutional right. Roe v. Wade protects a woman's right to choose without excessive government restriction. They did rule depending what trimester the woman is in, the government can step in. ]]> 2021-09-13 21:32:44 UTC https://padlet.com/justinecosta1/wqrecbwckrc5o4dz/wish/1737428275 Roe V Wade https://padlet.com/justinecosta1/wqrecbwckrc5o4dz/wish/1737428326 2021-09-13 21:32:46 UTC https://padlet.com/justinecosta1/wqrecbwckrc5o4dz/wish/1737428326 ca0307 https://padlet.com/justinecosta1/wqrecbwckrc5o4dz/wish/1737431654 2021-09-13 21:35:00 UTC https://padlet.com/justinecosta1/wqrecbwckrc5o4dz/wish/1737431654 1963 my0949 https://padlet.com/justinecosta1/wqrecbwckrc5o4dz/wish/1737432272   Earl Gideon was arrested and charged with breaking and entering with the intent to commit petty theft, based on a burglary that was committed between midnight and 8 A.M. on June 3, 1961, at a pool room in Panama City, Florida. The arrest was based entirely on the report of a witness that he had seen Gideon in the pool room at 5:30 A.M. on the night of the crime claiming that Gideon had a wine bottle and money in his pockets. The court declined the right to the 14 amendment due to state law which said that the only time indigent defendants could be appointed an attorney was when charged with a capital offense. This case also denied his right to the Sixth Amendment which was violated through the denial of counsel.]]> 2021-09-13 21:35:26 UTC https://padlet.com/justinecosta1/wqrecbwckrc5o4dz/wish/1737432272 Outboard Marine Corp. v. Superior Court https://padlet.com/justinecosta1/wqrecbwckrc5o4dz/wish/1737436675 Howarth (A Marine representative) using the first amendment, the purchaser of the OMC vehicle filed suit against the produces of OMC vehicles. The reason was because they did not disclose the defects which were many. The most significant was break failure. ]]> 2021-09-13 21:38:33 UTC https://padlet.com/justinecosta1/wqrecbwckrc5o4dz/wish/1737436675 Verdict dm0916 https://padlet.com/justinecosta1/wqrecbwckrc5o4dz/wish/1737437450 The trial ended in a 7-2 decision for Jane Roe. In the first trimester the pregnant woman and her physician are the ones to make the decision. In the second and third trimester the state can impose regulations or prohibit them entirely. (Oyez, 2021, para. 7). ]]> 2021-09-13 21:39:05 UTC https://padlet.com/justinecosta1/wqrecbwckrc5o4dz/wish/1737437450 my0949 https://padlet.com/justinecosta1/wqrecbwckrc5o4dz/wish/1737444786 (outcome) Gideon was then sentenced to five years in prison where he kept in touch with legal resources and wrote to the U.S Supreme Court. The basis of the appeal was his Sixth Amendment rights being violated through the denial of counsel.]]> 2021-09-13 21:44:18 UTC https://padlet.com/justinecosta1/wqrecbwckrc5o4dz/wish/1737444786 Miranda v. Arizona 1963 https://padlet.com/justinecosta1/wqrecbwckrc5o4dz/wish/1737450529 The constitutional right under this was the 5th amendment. The Fifth Amendment requires that law enforcement officials advise suspects of their right to remain silent and to obtain an attorney during interrogations while in police custody. After being taken into custody 2 hours after interrogation the police obtained a written confession from Miranda. He was found guilty for a kidnapping and rape."Miranda v. Arizona." Oyez, www.oyez.org/cases/1965/759. Accessed 13 Sep. 2021. - Joselyn Villarreal]]> 2021-09-13 21:48:07 UTC https://padlet.com/justinecosta1/wqrecbwckrc5o4dz/wish/1737450529 Jocelvi Medina https://padlet.com/justinecosta1/wqrecbwckrc5o4dz/wish/1737450876 Rove V. Wade was a landmark legal decision issued on January 22, 1973, in which the U.S Supreme Court struck down a Texas statute banning abortion effectively legalizing and procedure across the United States. 

    ("Rove v. Wade" , 2019, para.1).]]>     2021-09-13 21:48:24 UTC https://padlet.com/justinecosta1/wqrecbwckrc5o4dz/wish/1737450876     Miranda v. Arizona 1963 https://padlet.com/justinecosta1/wqrecbwckrc5o4dz/wish/1737454676 The constitution right under this was the 5th amendment. The Fifth Amendment requires that law enforcement officials advise suspects of their right to remain silent and to obtain an attorney during interrogations while in police custody.  They had told him that anything he says can be used against him in court of law After these warnings were given, a defendant could knowingly and intelligently waive these rights and agree to answer questions or make a statement."Miranda v. Arizona." Oyez, www.oyez.org/cases/1965/759. Accessed 13 Sep. 2021]]> 2021-09-13 21:51:02 UTC https://padlet.com/justinecosta1/wqrecbwckrc5o4dz/wish/1737454676 hh0083 https://padlet.com/justinecosta1/wqrecbwckrc5o4dz/wish/1737457386 The amendment under review was the 14th amendment. This gives the right to privacy.]]> 2021-09-13 21:53:08 UTC https://padlet.com/justinecosta1/wqrecbwckrc5o4dz/wish/1737457386 https://padlet.com/justinecosta1/wqrecbwckrc5o4dz/wish/1737457509 The constitutional right to personal privacy, which was protected by the First, Fourth, Fifth, Ninth, and Fourteenth amendments, was under review in the Roe V. Wade case.

    In the case, the evidence presented was that a woman's right to choosing to have an abortion is their own private decision and therefore falls under the right of privacy.

    The process of the decision consisted of the judges deciding that the case was not moot as pregnancy is usually a reason for a not moot decision, analyzing both arguments, and then deciding their verdict.
    ("Roe v. Wade", n.d., pg. 1)]]>     2021-09-13 21:53:14 UTC https://padlet.com/justinecosta1/wqrecbwckrc5o4dz/wish/1737457509     The evidence presented in court was the written confession forced by police https://padlet.com/justinecosta1/wqrecbwckrc5o4dz/wish/1737461412 After being arrested and interrogated for two hours Miranda was forced to give a written confession so it could be used against him in court. Both the oral and written confessions were presented to the jury at the trial. -Emiliah M.]]> 2021-09-13 21:56:07 UTC https://padlet.com/justinecosta1/wqrecbwckrc5o4dz/wish/1737461412 The Supreme Court decided the outcome. gl0155 https://padlet.com/justinecosta1/wqrecbwckrc5o4dz/wish/1737466360 Supreme Court judges decided wether or not Miranda's confession was rightfully written. Four justices (the majority) said that the interrogation was unconstitutional, and created a new law that made police officers remind people of their right to remain silent and right to an attorney as they were arrested.
    As for Miranda's trial, he was retried for his original crime of kidnapping and r*pe, and was sentenced to 20-30 years in prison. His confession was not brought up as evidence in the second trial.
    ("Facts and Case Summary - Miranda v. Arizona", n.d., para. 1, 2, 9, 10).]]>     2021-09-13 21:59:27 UTC https://padlet.com/justinecosta1/wqrecbwckrc5o4dz/wish/1737466360     Earl Gideon my0949 https://padlet.com/justinecosta1/wqrecbwckrc5o4dz/wish/1737466439 2021-09-13 21:59:31 UTC https://padlet.com/justinecosta1/wqrecbwckrc5o4dz/wish/1737466439 Regents of the University of California v. Bakke(1978)- Jovana E, Harleen K, Lillyanna M, Zohal S https://padlet.com/justinecosta1/wqrecbwckrc5o4dz/wish/1737478949 This case was about the university using racial "quotas" in its admission process, the fourteenth amendment Equal Protection Clause. Some of the evidence presented was a white applicant got denied twice to the medical school even though MCAT scores, GPA, and benchmark scores were significantly higher than some of the other accepted applicants. The process of the decision was a 5-4 decision saying the university did consider race(in this case whites) as a factor, they had to go through judicial, administrative, or legislative. The outcome of this case from the Supreme Court ruled that a university's use of racial "quotas" in its admissions process was unconstitutional.
    Citation: (McBride, 2006 para1)
    (McBride, 2006, para 2)
    (McBride, 2006, para 3)]]>     2021-09-13 22:09:34 UTC https://padlet.com/justinecosta1/wqrecbwckrc5o4dz/wish/1737478949     1979 https://padlet.com/justinecosta1/wqrecbwckrc5o4dz/wish/1737479250 The California Supreme Court agreed, finding that the quota system explicitly discriminated against racial groups and holding that "no applicant may be rejected because of his race, in favor of another who is less qualified, as measured by standards applied without regard to race." The medical school, ordered to shut down its quota system, appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, which reviewed the case in 1978.]]> 2021-09-13 22:09:48 UTC https://padlet.com/justinecosta1/wqrecbwckrc5o4dz/wish/1737479250 Other court cases were brought up during the process. gl0155 https://padlet.com/justinecosta1/wqrecbwckrc5o4dz/wish/1737479281 Several other cases came up that went similarly. The criminals were caught and interrogated into a confession. The Supreme Court realized that these were unjust and reversed the judgement of these cases.]]> 2021-09-13 22:09:49 UTC https://padlet.com/justinecosta1/wqrecbwckrc5o4dz/wish/1737479281 The Great Depression. (1930s-1940s) https://padlet.com/justinecosta1/wqrecbwckrc5o4dz/wish/1737485784 Alexandra Romo


    The outcome of this court case, collapsed in the economic in 1930. It was one of the most defining traumas of the 20th century. For many Americans, the New Deal, launched by President Franklin D. Roosevelt, remains the standard for how the federal government should respond to a major national emergency.


    The lessons of the Great depression By Lizabeth Cohen

    ]]>     2021-09-13 22:14:56 UTC https://padlet.com/justinecosta1/wqrecbwckrc5o4dz/wish/1737485784     Miranda v. Arizona 1966 ac0421 https://padlet.com/justinecosta1/wqrecbwckrc5o4dz/wish/1737485956 On March 13, 1963, Ernesto Miranda was arrested in his house and brought to the police station where he was questioned by police officers in connection with a kidnapping and rape. After two hours of interrogation, the police obtained a written confession from Miranda. The written confession was admitted into evidence at trial despite the objection of the defense attorney and the fact that the police officers admitted that they had not advised Miranda of his right to have an attorney present during the interrogation. The jury found Miranda guilty. On appeal, the Supreme Court of Arizona affirmed and held that Miranda’s constitutional rights were not violated because he did not specifically request counsel.]]> 2021-09-13 22:15:05 UTC https://padlet.com/justinecosta1/wqrecbwckrc5o4dz/wish/1737485956 citations https://padlet.com/justinecosta1/wqrecbwckrc5o4dz/wish/1737487402 ("Gideon v. Wainwrigh," n.d., para. 1).

    ]]>     2021-09-13 22:16:15 UTC https://padlet.com/justinecosta1/wqrecbwckrc5o4dz/wish/1737487402     Mapp v. Ohio (1961) Dulce Carrillo dc0585 https://padlet.com/justinecosta1/wqrecbwckrc5o4dz/wish/1749650419 Mapp v. Ohio was a 1961 landmark Supreme Court case decided 6–3 by the Warren Court, in which it was held that Fourth Amendment's protection against unreasonable searches and seizures applied to the states and excluded unconstitutionally obtained evidence from use in state criminal prosecutions. This decision overruled Wolf v. Colorado and reversed the conviction of appellant Dollree Mapp."Mapp v. Ohio. 

    Dollree Mapp’s home in Cleveland, Ohio was forcefully entered by police officers who believed that a suspected bomber was inside the house. While searching her home, officers found pornographic books. Later, Mapp was prosecuted under an Ohio statute for knowing possession of lewd and lascivious material. She was convicted even though the prosecution was unable to produce a valid search warrant.

    The majority held that all evidence obtained unconstitutionally, without a search warrant, is inadmissible in state criminal prosecutions. Such evidence was already barred in federal courts, but the majority agreed that the exclusionary rule for unlawfully seized evidence applied to state courts as well, through the Fourteenth Amendment. The Supreme Court insisted that the exclusionary rule had to apply to the states, or else the Fourth Amendment was essentially useless.


    Citation: (Wex Definitions Team, 2020, para.1.2.3).]]>     2021-09-17 21:32:37 UTC https://padlet.com/justinecosta1/wqrecbwckrc5o4dz/wish/1749650419     Andrew G https://padlet.com/justinecosta1/wqrecbwckrc5o4dz/wish/1766157984 Together with No. 106, Alabama Power Co. et al. v. United States et al., on appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Columbia.  James O'Malley, Jr., argued the cause for appellants in No. 78. With him on the briefs were Louis J. Lefkowitz, Attorney General of New York, Walter J. Myskowski, Sheila H. Marshall, and Alfred E. Froh. Charles J. McCarthy argued the cause for appellants in No. 106. With him on the briefs were Arthur L. Winn, Jr., J. Raymond Clark, and Richard J. Hardy.  Deputy Solicitor General Springer argued the cause for the United States et al. in both cases. With him on the brief were Solicitor General Griswold, Assistant Attorney General McLaren, Howard E. Shapiro, Edward M. Shulman, William A. Imhof, Robert W. Ginnane, and Arthur J. Cerra. Hugh B. Cox argued the cause for appellees Aberdeen & Rockfish Railroad Co. et al. in both cases. With him on the brief were William H. Allen and Michael Boudin.  John F. Donelan and John M. Cleary filed a brief in No. 106 for the National Industrial Traffic League as amicus curiae urging reversal.  PER CURIAM.  The judgments are affirmed by an equally divided Court.  MR. JUSTICE DOUGLAS took no part in the consideration or decision of these cases.  Page 400 U.S. 73, 74]]> 2021-09-24 16:44:36 UTC https://padlet.com/justinecosta1/wqrecbwckrc5o4dz/wish/1766157984 Citation https://padlet.com/justinecosta1/wqrecbwckrc5o4dz/wish/1782513608
    Molitor, (B.M), Fifth Amendment Miranda Rights, Findlaw.com, August 12, 2020. https://www.findlaw.com/criminal/criminal-rights/miranda-rights-and-the-fifth-amendment.html 

    ge title

    , from URL

    ]]>     2021-09-30 20:43:43 UTC https://padlet.com/justinecosta1/wqrecbwckrc5o4dz/wish/1782513608     Dred Scott v. Sandford, 1857 (7-2 decision) https://padlet.com/justinecosta1/wqrecbwckrc5o4dz/wish/1811973555 Taney became best known for writing the final majority opinion in Dred Scott v. Sandford, which said that all people of African descent, free or enslaved, were not United States citizens and therefore had no right to sue in federal court.]]> 2021-10-12 20:41:56 UTC https://padlet.com/justinecosta1/wqrecbwckrc5o4dz/wish/1811973555