In <em>Mapp v. Ohio</em>, the Supreme Court ruled <u>B. If the police</u> violate the law to obtain evidence, they cannot use that evidence against an accused person in court.
<h3>What was the place of evidence in the case of Mapp v. Ohio?</h3>
The U.S. Supreme Court ruled against the state in a 5-3 vote, favoring Mapp, from whom evidence was obtained without due process.
The implication is that evidence seized unlawfully from a suspect or an accused, without a search warrant, could not be used in criminal prosecutions in state courts.
Thus, in <em>Mapp v. Ohio</em>, the Supreme Court ruled <u>B. If the police</u> violate the law to obtain evidence, they cannot use that evidence against an accused person in court.
Learn more about the importance of evidence in criminal prosecutions at brainly.com/question/7802791
#SPJ1
Its 2 because the domestication of plants and animals was a huge things and it still helps us today
Answer:
3
Explanation:
In terms of time both empires were flourishing around the same time.
The Congress of Racial Equality (CORE) sponsored<span> most of the subsequent </span>Freedom Rides<span>, but some were also organized by the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee (SNCC).</span>
