Final answer:
The Supreme Court in Wolf v. Colorado ruled that the Fourteenth Amendment prohibits evidence obtained by unreasonable search and seizure from being used in state courts. However, the full application of the exclusionary rule to the states was established later in Mapp v. Ohio.
Step-by-step explanation:
In the case of Wolf v. Colorado, the United States Supreme Court ruled that the Fourteenth Amendment does forbid the admission of evidence obtained by an unreasonable search and seizure in a prosecution in a state court for a state crime. This ruling applies the protections of the Fourth Amendment, which guarantees the right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, to the states. However, it was not until the Mapp v. Ohio decision in 1961 that the exclusionary rule, which prohibits illegally obtained evidence from being used in court, was fully applied to state courts.
The exclusionary rule has its roots in the 1914 case of Weeks v. United States, which established the rule at the federal level. The Supreme Court has since issued rulings that have both expanded and limited the scope of the Fourth Amendment, carving out exceptions to the warrant requirement under certain conditions, such as exigent circumstances or when a person has no reasonable expectation of privacy.