Fourth Amendment Precedent

Match each case with the precedent it established.

Horton v. California

Officers can legally carry out a stop and

frisk

Mapp v. Ohio

Officers can gather evidence that is in

plain view

Terry v. Ohio

Convictions cannot be based on

evidence from an illegal search.

Please see below for answer.

Explanation: Matching each case with the precedent it established we have ,

Terry v. Ohioofficers can legally carry out a stop and frisk

Horton v. CaliforniaOfficers can gather evidence that is in plain view

Mapp v. Ohioconvictions cannot be based on evidence from an illegal search.

The Fourth Amendment ensures only  a fair process for  searches and  for seizures and it  states that "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon Probable cause."

Terry v. Ohio

- "bill clinton ( the 42nd u.s. president, served in office from by low unemployment, declining crime rates and a budget surplus. during clinton's second term, the u.s. economy was healthy, unemployment was low and the nation experienced a major technology boom and the rise of the internet."