mapp v. ohio (1961)

• information:

  • police went into dollree mapp’s with a fake warrant

    • she was presumed to be affiliated with a bomber —> was arrested

• amendment:

  • mapp felt it was a violation of her 4th amendment rights

    • the exclusionary rule

• lower court:

  • voted against mapp

• supreme court:

  • voted 6-3 for mapp (was a violation)

    • applies to everyone

    *all evidence obtained illegally cannot be used in court —> exclusionary rule

gideon v. wainwright (1963)

• information:

  • gideon arrested for breaking and entering (was poor)

    • he could not get an attorney

• amendment:

  • he read in jail that he was supposed to get a lawyer but he didn’t, felt like a violation of his 6th amendment rights

    • right to an attorney

• lower court:

  • voted against gideon

• supreme court:

  • ruled unanimous for gideon (was a violation)

    *all defendants receive public defenders if they cannot afford an attorney if they request for one

    “necessities, not luxuries”

miranda v. arizona (1966)

• information:

  • ernesto miranda committed rape

    • testified against himself (he didn’t know his rights)

• amendment:

  • he didn’t know his rights and was a victim of self-incrimination, which he felt was a violation of his 5th amendment rights

    • due process —> self-incrimination

• lower court:

  • voted against miranda (said that he should’ve known his rights)

• supreme court:

  • ruled 5-4 for miranda (was a violation)

    *people must be told their rights at the time of arrest

    • miranda rights: application of the 5th amendment

lemon v. kurtzman (1971)

• information:

  • lemon was mad about his taxpayer funds are going to religious schools

    • (especially of those he did not support)

• amendment:

  • sued because of the 1st amendment

    • establishment clause

• lower court:

  • voted against lemon (money is being used for non-religious purposes)

• supreme court:

  • ruled 8-1 for lemon (was a violation)

    *tax money and government cannot fund private schools

    • lemon test

gregg v. georgia (1976)

• information:

  • troy leon gregg murdered a couple hitchhiking

    • did not plan to murder but to rob (found guilty)

• amendment:

  • gregg believe the death penalty was a violation of his 8th amendment rights

    • excessive punishment

• lower court:

  • voted against gregg (for the state)

• supreme court:

  • ruled 7-2 for the state (was NOT a violation)

    *death penalty can be used as a punishment (if the court follows due process)

    • overturned furman v. georgia that abolished the death penalty for 4 years

in re gault (1967)

• information:

  • gault (15) was taken into custody for a prank call

    • parents were not notified

• amendment:

  • parents sued because they felt like the 5th amendment was violated

    • due process (how far it extended)

• supreme court:

  • ruled 8-1 for gault (was a violation)

    *due process rights and procedures must be followed on all levels of government, especially for minors

    • this also applies in schools

tinker v. des moines (1969)

• information:

  • mary beth tinker and christopher eckhardt were suspended for wearing armbands

    • vietnam era: children wore black bands for peace

      • john tinker was suspend the next day

• amendment:

  • parents sued as they felt it was a violation for the 1st amendment

    • freedom of speech

• lower court:

  • voted for the school

• supreme court:

  • ruled 7-2 for students

    • schools needed to prove it was a distraction (was a violation)

      *schools can only limit if it is distracting to students and causes a disruption to learning

new jersey v. tlo (1985)

• information:

  • tlo was caught smoking and her bag was searched without her consent

    • told that they cannot search her bag

• amendment:

  • felt like a violation of her 4th amendment rights

    • exclusionary rule

• lower court:

  • voted for tlo (warrant was needed)

• supreme court:

  • ruled 6-3 for new jersey (was NOT a violation)

    • the search was reasonable

    *the exclusionary rule is not applied in schools —> students can be searched with just reasonable SUSPICION

bethel v. fraser (1986)

• information:

  • matt fraser was suspended for two days for reading a lewd speech (stuco speech for his bff jeff)

    • caused disruptions (students were laughing)

• amendment:

  • he sued because he felt like it was a violation of the 1st amendment

    • freedom of speech

• lower court:

  • voted for the school

• supreme court:

  • ruled 7-2 for the school (was NOT a violation)

    *schools can limit speech if it is lewd or vulgar

hazelwood boe v. kuhlmeier (1988)

• information:

  • kuhlmeier wrote on birth, pregnancy, and divorce in the school newspaper (had lots of stigma against it at the time)

    • the principal, however, removed the articles

• amendment:

  • sued the districts because she felt like of was a violation of the 1st amendment

    • freedom of speech and press

• lower court:

  • voted for kuhlmeier (impacts the community as well)

• supreme court:

  • ruled 5-3 for the school (was NOT a violation)

    • was a part of the school curriculum

    *if students’ voice does not align with the school’s, it does not have to be allowed and can be restricted

thompson v. oklahoma (1988)

• information:

  • william thompson convicted of 1st degree murder of charles keene (got sentenced the death penalty)

• amendment:

  • felt like a violation of the 8th amendment (should not have to be sentenced at 15)

    • cruel and unjust punishment

• lower court:

  • voted for the state

• supreme court:

  • ruled 5-3 for thompson (was a violation)

    • revoked his death sentence

    *those of 15 or younger cannot get the death penalty (too young)

board of education v. earls (2002)

• information:

  • school initiated a drug testing policy (urine samples)

    • occurs if you are a part of after school and extracurricular activities

• amendment:

  • felt like a violation of the 4th amendment

    • unreasonable search and seizures

• lower court:

  • voted for earls (the school needed cause for doing so)

• supreme court:

  • ruled 5-4 for the school (was NOT a violation)

    *schools can continue to conduct suspicionless drug testing for those involved in any extracurriculars

morse v. frederick (2005)

• information:

  • frederick posted a sign that said “bong hits 4 jesus”

    • was suspended for 10 days

• amendment:

  • sued the principal as he felt she violated the 1st amendment

    • freedom of speech

• lower court:

  • voted for frederick

• supreme court:

  • ruled 5-4 for the school (was NOT a violation)

    • students cannot go against school values

    *schools have the power to interfere in students’ speech of influencing drug use and anything that goes against school values

roper v. simmons (2005)

• information:

  • simmons (17 —> already 18) commited murder of shirley crook by throwing her off a bridge

    • was caught and sentenced the death penalty

• amendment:

  • felt like getting death was a violation o the 8th amendment

    • cruel and unusual punishment

• lower court:

  • voted against simmons

• supreme court:

  • ruled 5-4 for simmons (was a violation)

    *those who were minors at the time of the crime cannot be given the death penalty

district of columbia v. heller (2008)

• information:

  • heller wanted a gun for protection at home but cannot due to a ban on handguns

    • he is a police officer

• amendment:

  • he felt like it was a violation of the 2nd amendment

• lower court:

  • voted for heller (should have rights)

• supreme court:

  • ruled 5-4 for heller (was a violation)

    • district court violated his rights

    *the 2nd amendment applies to all individuals

    • states cannot ban the use of handguns, but can make strict laws and regulations like new jersey