The 1961 mapp v. ohio case that went before the warren court was related to
the right to a court-appointed attorney.
the right to remain silent after an arrest.
the use of incriminating statements.
the use of illegally obtained evidence.

The correct answer is D.

Mapp v. Ohio ( 1961 ) was a landmark case in criminal procedure. The Supreme Court decided that evidence obtained from an unreasonable search and seizure could not be used against the accused in criminal state court. The federal courts had already held this for a violation of the Constitution.

Police officers forced their way into the house of Dollree Mapps without a proper search warrant. She was apparently involved in illegal gambling activities and the police suspected that she was hiding a dangerous bomber in her house. The suspect was not found ( he was hiding in the apartment of the downstairs tenant and cleared of the charges later ), but the police found a lot of obscene and lewd pictures which were then introduced into evidence.

Mapp was arrested for possessing these pictures, and was convicted in an Ohio court. She took her case to the Supreme Court, arguing that the 4th Amendment had been violated.

The Supreme Court ruled in a 5-3 vote in favor of Mapp. Evidence seized unlawfully, without a search warrant, could not be used in criminal prosecutions in state courts.

The correct answer is D.

Mapp v. Ohio ( 1961 ) was a landmark case in criminal procedure. The Supreme Court decided that evidence obtained from an unreasonable search and seizure could not be used against the accused in criminal state court. The federal courts had already held this for a violation of the Constitution.

Police officers forced their way into the house of Dollree Mapps without a proper search warrant. She was apparently involved in illegal gambling activities and the police suspected that she was hiding a dangerous bomber in her house. The suspect was not found ( he was hiding in the apartment of the downstairs tenant and cleared of the charges later ), but the police found a lot of obscene and lewd pictures which were then introduced into evidence.

Mapp was arrested for possessing these pictures, and was convicted in an Ohio court. She took her case to the Supreme Court, arguing that the 4th Amendment had been violated.

The Supreme Court ruled in a 5-3 vote in favor of Mapp. Evidence seized unlawfully, without a search warrant, could not be used in criminal prosecutions in state courts.

the right answer is the constitution

china is shifting toward specialization in industry and services and away from agriculture.

explanation:

mark brainliest