| 翻訳と辞書 |
| Wolf v. Colorado ： ウィキペディア英語版 |
Wolf v. Colorado
Wolf v. Colorado, 338 U.S. 25 (1949) was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held 6-3 that while the Fourth Amendment was applicable to the states, the exclusionary rule was not a necessary ingredient of the Fourth Amendment's right against warrantless and unreasonable searches and seizures. In Weeks v. United States 232 U.S. 383 (1914) the Court held that as a matter of judicial implication the exclusionary rule was enforceable in federal courts but not derived from the explicit requirements of the Fourth Amendment. The Wolf Court decided not to incorporate the exclusionary rule as part of the Fourth Amendment in large part because the States which had rejected the Weeks Doctrine (the exclusionary rule) had not left the right to privacy without other means of protection (i.e. the States had their own rules to deter police officers from conducting warrantless and unreasonable searches and seizures). However, because most of the States' rules proved to be ineffective in deterrence, the Court overruled Wolf in Mapp v. Ohio 367 U.S. 643 (1961). This landmark case made the exclusionary rule enforceable against the States through the Due Process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the same extent that it applied against the federal government.
==Background of the case==
The plaintiff, Julius A. Wolf, was convicted in the District Court of the City and County of Denver of conspiracy to perform criminal abortions. On appeal, the convictions were affirmed by the Supreme Court of Colorado (187 P.2d 926, 928). Wolf appealed the conviction by a writ of certiorari and the U.S. Supreme Court decided to hear the appeal.
抄文引用元・出典: フリー百科事典『 ウィキペディア（Wikipedia）』
■ウィキペディアで「Wolf v. Colorado」の詳細全文を読む
スポンサード リンク
| 翻訳と辞書 : 翻訳のためのインターネットリソース |
Copyright(C) kotoba.ne.jp 1997-2016. All Rights Reserved.
|
|