In which case did the U.S. Supreme Court rule on the exclusionary rule?

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled on the exclusionary rule in the case of Mapp v. Ohio. This landmark decision held that evidence obtained in violation of the Fourth Amendment, which protects against unreasonable searches and seizures, cannot be used in state courts. The ruling extended the exclusionary rule, which originally applied to federal law enforcement, to state law enforcement as well. By doing so, the Court ensured that not only federal courts but also state courts were required to uphold the constitutional rights of individuals regarding unlawful searches and the admissibility of evidence. This case fundamentally affected law enforcement practices and the rights of suspects within the criminal justice system.

The other cases listed have significant implications in different aspects of law enforcement and rights protection but do not specifically address the exclusionary rule. Terry v. Ohio focuses on stop-and-frisk procedures, Graham v. Connor addresses the use of force and excessive force by law enforcement, and Miranda v. Arizona establishes the requirement for Miranda warnings upon arrest, but none of them specifically set forth the principles of the exclusionary rule established in Mapp v. Ohio.