Real Crime/Paranormal/Conspiracy Theories Book III

Dollree Mapp: Illegal Police Tactics

Dollree Mapp (October 30, 1923 –October 31, 2014) was the appellant in the Supreme Court case Mappv. Ohio (1961). She argued that her right to privacy in her home,the Fourth Amendment, was violated by police officers who entered herhouse with what she thought to be a fake search warrant. Mapp alsoargued that the Exclusionary Rule was violated due to the collectionof the evidence that was found after the police had entered her housewithout a convincing search warrant according to Mapp's experience.In the Supreme Court case, Mapp v. Ohio, the decision was madein favor of Mapp, in a 6-3 ruling. As a result of the ruling in Mappv. Ohio, Mapp's conviction was voided. A few years after Mappv. Ohio was ruled upon, Mapp was convicted again, but this timefor the possession of narcotics. After her prison sentence had ended,she began working "for a non-profit that provided legalassistance to inmates."

Mapp v. Ohio

In May 1957, following a bombing at thehome of future boxing promoter Don King, police received a tipleading them to the home of Dollree Mapp. The police "showedup at Mapp's place, demanding to be let in." Mapp refusedand was advised by her lawyer to request a search warrant. The policeleft and returned in around 15 minutes, forcing their way into herhouse by breaking the door. The police would not show Mapp the searchwarrant, causing Mapp to believe the warrant was blank. She took thewarrant and put it in her blouse so the police would not take it. However, one of the officers "went down anyway," and took thepaper from Mapp. The officer found evidence of pornography in Mapp'shouse. As a result, Mapp was "charged under an Ohio law thatmade possession of obscene material a felony." Mapp wassentenced with 7 years in prison. While on bond, however, sheappealed to the Ohio Supreme Court, which rejected her case. She thenappealed to the U.S Supreme Court "on the basis of freedom ofexpression" and they accepted her case. The Supreme CourtJustices all "drew laughs from the courtroom gallery whileleaving no doubt how absurd they found Ohio's obscenity statute." Initially, there was unanimous agreement that the Ohio obscenitylaw was not in line with the First Amendment. However, when theargument was altered to focus on the Fourth Amendment by JusticeClark, only 5 justices decided that the evidence taken from Mapp'shome, without a search warrant, was "illegally obtained." In addition, the materials the officers had found, Mapp pleaded,were her roommate's obscene materials and commented saying, "Lookat what terrible things men read. Let's put it away." This case's overarching question was, "Were the confiscatedmaterials protected from seizure by the Fourth Amendment?" As a result of the Mapp opinion, the Supreme Court extended theobtainment of illegal evidence rule to the states. The case wasargued on March 29, 1961 and decided on June 19, 1961.

Exclusionary rule

In Mapp v. Ohio the SupremeCourt deemed it unconstitutional to use the evidence of pornographygathered from the police officers when they illegally searched Mapp'shouse. This ruling was based on the protection from "anunreasonable search or seizure" stated in the FourthAmendment. However, the exclusionary rule is not cited in theConstitution, but rather a Supreme Court implication. The SupremeCourt "found that the Fourteenth Amendment right to dueprocess of law and the Fourth Amendment right against unreasonablesearches and seizures could not be properly enforced as long asillegally obtained evidence continued to be presented in court." This realization of the Court is what allowed Dollree Mapp andher lawyer to make a "motion to suppress" theevidence. In other words, having the judge determine whether theevidence was gathered legally. In Mapp's case it was not, so theevidence was not included in the trial. In the majority opinion, theSupreme Court "recognized that the purpose of theexclusionary rule "is to deter - to compel respect forthe constitutional guaranty in the only effectively available way -by removing the incentive to disregard it." However, theCourt makes an effort to say that it is not the exclusionary rulewhich sets the appellant free, "it is the law that sets himfree." In Mapp v. Ohio, when Mapp's conviction wasoverturned it was due to the fact that the law "gives to theindividual no more than that which the Constitution guarantees him."Mapp v. Ohio, Gideon v. Wainwright, and Miranda v. Arizona,were all major cases that had large affects on policing and searchwarrant requirements thereafter.

Career

Dollree Mapp moved to New York afterher Supreme Court case. In 1971, Mapp was arrested and sentenced to 8years in prison for the possession of heroin. After serving prisontime in the Bedford Hills Correctional Facility for Women, Mappworked for a non-profit that "provided legal assistance toinmates." She also worked as a talented seamstress anddressmaker, in addition to other businesses such as, beauty andupholstery. Her niece Carolyn Mapp stated that some of her aunt'sbusinesses "were legitimate, and some of them were whateverthey were." Mapp also spoke at law schools and about her caseMapp v. Ohio. Later in 1987, she was interviewed by a politicalscience professor and the book was later published.

Later years

Dollree Mapp was the sole survivor ofher immediate relatives after her daughter Barbara died in 2002. Itwas around this time as well that Mapp began to show the beginningsigns of dementia. She tried to stay active in her late 80s, but diedon October 31, 2014, in Conyers, Georgia, when she was 91. Hergreat-niece Tiffany recalled, "My great aunt was very, very,very strong-willed," adding: "She didn't prepare for death. Ithink Aunt Dolly thought she was going to live forever."

Personal life

Dollree Mapp was born on October 30 inForest, Mississippi. She was one of 7 children and the daughter of acattleman and schoolteacher. When she was 10 years old, she left herfamily to live in Cleveland with her aunt. Five years later, Mapp waspregnant and gave birth to her daughter Barbara Bivins with thefather, Jimmy Bivins, a boxer whom she soon married. However, Mapp"accused Bivins of beating her, and they were soon divorced." She said, "I had to leave him or kill him, and I wasn'tready to kill him." Later, Mapp was engaged to boxer ArchieMoore, but he called off the wedding, in which case, Mapp "suedhim for breach of promise." The case involved allegations ofsexual abuse and made headlines around the country; as a result, Mappwas a local celebrity in the African-American community in Cleveland,and her doings were reported in the society and gossip columns ofCleveland's popular African-American newspaper, the Cleveland Call &Post. Mapp had been in New York since her marriage to Bivins, butdecided to move back to Cleveland (at 30 years old) with her daughterafter the break up with Moore. She stayed close to the boxing world,and that is how she came into contact with her neighbor Don King,whose home had allegedly been bombed by the man the police weresearching for the night they came to Mapp's house. After Mapp's casewas appealed by the Supreme Court, she moved to Queens where she wasarrested for possession of heroin and stolen property. "Mappworked on issues related to prisoners' rights and sought to reducelong mandatory sentences for drug offenses," which she continuedlater in her life after she was released from prison in 1981"when New York Gov. Hugh L. Carey ended her sentence. She kept workingfor inmates through her employment at a non-profit, which gave aid toinmates and gave her a platform to speak about her court experience.