Wolf v. People of the State of Colorado
Significance, Due Process Represents A Living Principle, Only Exclusion Will Deter Violations, Impact
Julius A. Wolf
People of the State of Colorado
That evidence, obtained illegally, should not have been used against Wolf at his state trial for a state offense because it violated his constitutional rights.
Chief Lawyer for Petitioner
Chief Lawyer for Respondent
James S. Henderson
Justices for the Court
Hugo Lafayette Black, Harold Burton, Felix Frankfurter (writing for the Court), Robert H. Jackson, Stanley Forman Reed, Fred Moore Vinson
William O. Douglas, Frank Murphy, Wiley Blount Rutledge
Date of Decision
27 June 1949
Affirmed the decision of the Supreme Court of Colorado to let stand Wolf's conviction on the ground that, although the Fourth Amendment applied to the states, the states were not required to exclude evidence obtained unlawfully.
- Weeks v. United States, 232 U.S. 383 (1914).
- Palko v. California, 302 U.S. 319 (1937).
- McNabb v. United States, 318 U.S. 332 (1943).
- Adamson v. California, 332 U.S. 46 (1947).
- Mapp v. Ohio, 367 U.S. 643 (1961).
- Hall, Kermit L., ed. The Oxford Companion to the Supreme Court of the United States. New York: Oxford University Press, 1992.
- Levy, Leonard W., ed. Encyclopedia of the American Constitution. Vol. 4. New York: Macmillan, 1986.
- Woods v. Cloyd W. Miller Co. - Significance, Solicitor General
- Wickard v. Filburn - Significance, Supreme Court Extends Commerce Power To Production, Further Readings
- Wolf v. People of the State of Colorado - Significance
- Wolf v. People of the State of Colorado - Due Process Represents A Living Principle
- Wolf v. People of the State of Colorado - Only Exclusion Will Deter Violations
- Wolf v. People of the State of Colorado - Impact
- Other Free Encyclopedias