One concurring justice in this case draws on Rochin v. United States and his previous dissent in Adamson v. California, while the majority opinion often cites the cases of Boyd v. United States and Weeks v. United States as historical precedents on the central constitutional issue. Dissenters included Justices Whittaker and Frankfurter who joined with Harlan in lambasting the court for forgetting its sense of judicial res
One concurring justice in this case draws on Rochin v. United States and his previous dissent in Adamson v. California, while the majority opinion often cites the cases of Boyd v. United States and Weeks v. United States as historical precedents on the central constitutional issue. Dissenters included Justices Whittaker and Frankfurter who joined with Harlan in lambasting the court for forgetting its sense of judicial restraint in overruling Wolf v. Colorado.  The wake of this decision produced a doctrine known as the "fruit of the poisonous tree." FTP, name this 1961 Supreme Court decision in which seizure of lascivious material in a Cleveland woman's apartment was deemed unconstitutional.
One concurring justice in this case draws on Rochin v. United States and his previous dissent in Adamson v. California, while the majority opinion often cites the cases of Boyd v. United States and Weeks v. United States as historical precedents on the central constitutional issue.
Mapp v. Ohio