Chicago Police Department (CPD) Practice Exam 2025 – All-in-One Guide to Master Your Police Test Success!

Question: 1 / 400

What was a significant outcome of the Mapp vs. Ohio case?

Established the right to a public trial

Illegally obtained evidence cannot be used at trial

The significant outcome of the Mapp vs. Ohio case is that illegally obtained evidence cannot be used at trial. This ruling extended the exclusionary rule, which prevents law enforcement from using evidence gathered in violation of the Fourth Amendment rights of individuals, to state courts. Prior to this case, the exclusionary rule was primarily applied in federal cases, but Mapp vs. Ohio established that this principle is applicable across all levels of the judiciary, reinforcing the protection against unreasonable searches and seizures.

This ruling highlights the importance of adhering to constitutional protocols when conducting searches and obtaining evidence, ensuring that a fair trial is upheld. Law enforcement must follow legal procedures, and if evidence is obtained by violating a person’s rights, it cannot be presented during a trial, thus protecting the integrity of the judicial process.

Get further explanation with Examzify DeepDiveBeta

Police can arrest without warrants

No person can be compelled to testify against themselves

Next Question

Report this question

Download Chicago Police Department (CPD) Practice Exam 2025 – All-in-One Guide to Master Your Police Test Success! PDF Study Guide
Subscribe

Get the latest from Examzify

You can unsubscribe at any time. Read our privacy policy