Summary

Impact of the Case

The Mapp v. Ohio case is a landmark case in which the supreme court ruled that evidence gathered through an unreasonable search and seizure is inadmissible. this means that if a police officer or other law enforcement officer uses excessive force or unconstitutionally stops, interrogates, arrests, or searches someone, the evidence found by these actions are not admissible in court

"Mapp v. Ohio" is a pivotal case that ended the practice of illegal search and seizure in the United States. The Court ruled that it could not use evidence obtained illegally, so any officer who conducted an illegal search could no longer be involved in the case. The goal of this was to ensure that people are not convicted with circumstantial evidence and make sure there aren't abuses from law enforcement.

Summary

Impact of the Case

During the Gideon v. Wainwright (1963) case, the United States Supreme Court decision in which the Court ruled that all accused, regardless of their ability to pay, are entitled to have an attorney who will help them defend themselves during criminal proceedings. The case was brought by Clarence Earl Gideon, a man convicted of robbery and sentenced to 28 years in prison. He had been arrested and convicted based on inconclusive evidence presented by the police department. As Gedion would not defed himself as he did not possess any money for legal representation, he was sentenced without being permitted to defend himself, violating his rights under due process principles.

The Gideon v. Wainwright case established fender offices nationwide. The decision established that states must provide counsel for indigent defendants who cannot afford an attorney. Despite the crime not being capital, the person accused of a crime has a right to be heard by a lawyer, who may also be called upon to ensure fair trials according to due process of law.

Summary

Impact of the Case

          On March 23rd, in Furman v. Georgia and Gregg v. Georgia courts ruled that the death penalty is unconstitutional. This means that anyone in the US found guilty of aggravated murder will not receive the death penalty and instead might be required to serve life in prison without parole or lesser sentences such as life with no possibility of parole, or 40 years in prison without possibility of release on parole, or a shorter sentence.

The Furman v. Georgia and Gregg v. Georgia cases mark a turning point in the United States' approach to capital punishment - from that moment, American courts have constrained state discretion in using lethal injections as a means of execution. Executions following the Furman decision have relied on three methods: lethal gas, firing squad and electrocution- but these methods are not used to execute those sentenced since 1976

Summary

Impact of the Case

In the 1964 cases, the Supreme Court ruled that people have a right to  meet with their lawyers without being forced to provide a coerced confession. Additionally, they ruled that individuals should not be forced to answer incriminating questions without an attorney present. As of today, these rights are still seen as legitimate and are recognized in different facets of American life.

The Roper v. Simmons case was where the Supreme Court decided if juveniles were legally competent enough to be tried as adults for capital crimes such as murder.

The Roper v. Simmons, In re Gault case is a landmark Supreme Court decision that has significantly shaped child protection laws in the United States. The Court ruled that executing juvenile offenders under 18 years old was unconstitutional and abolished the death penalty for juveniles nationwide. This ruling also set a precedent to limit sentences for crimes committed by youth to those within corresponding age ranges of adult sentences, which makes it impossible for juveniles to be sentenced with life imprisonment or receive the death sentence.