CP Ch. 12 Plain View Flashcards
Plain view is not a search because:
officers already have a lawful reason to be present and see the evidence.
The heart of plain view is:
Lawful presence.
Police lawfully enter an apartment because a bullet had been fired from within. An officer, who remained on scene to secure the premises, became curious about the stereo equipment that seemed out of place. The officer moved the stereo in order to read the serial numbers. After checking with the station, he learned the equipment was indeed stolen. Will this evidence be admissible?
No.
Supreme court suppressed the evidence because the officer could not justify moving the stereo as part of the initial exigency that was his sole purpose for being there.
May evidence be seized if officers see it while properly executing an arrest warrant, but they don’t have a search warrant?
Yes. Arrest warrant or search warrant. Or both.
What rule forces officers who possess probable cause to obtain a warrant?
The inadvertence rule.
They may not simply choose an opportune moment to see the evidence.
At the same time, this rule never applies to contraband, stolen goods, or dangerous objects.
The inadvertence rule never applies to (3):
- Contraband
- Stolen goods
- Dangerous objects
Since most evidence falls into one of these categories, the rule rarely affects police activity. (Ex. although police had plenty of time to get a warrant for a stolen vehicle, they could seize it in plain view because the inadvertence rule does not apply to stolen property)
Practically speaking, the inadvertence rule is only an issue if police fail to:
fail to mention a particular object in their warrant application, even though they had probable cause for it.
Plain view:
The incriminating nature of an item must be:
immediately apparent to officers.
Plain View
(Blank), (blank), and (blank) should obviously be seized when observed.
Contraband, fruits, or instrumentalities of crime
Officers must have (blank) to believe items are related to crime in order to seize them.
Probable cause.
Plain View: Sufficient or Insufficient knowledge to seize evidence?
Police executed a search warrant based on probable cause defendant’s brother sold drugs there. Officers discovered storage lockers in the basement, and the defendants locker contained 100’s of CD’s with photocopied covers. They appeared to be counterfeit. 5 days later, a recording industry consultant assisted an officer in inventorying the CD’s. He confirmed they were counterfeit.
Sufficient.
This consultation was appropriate because the police had probable cause the CD’s were contraband BEFORE they called in the expert.
Plain View: Sufficient or Insufficient knowledge to seize evidence?
Police had probable cause to believe that there was evidence of drug dealing in the defendant’s apartment. While making an initial protective sweep, an officer saw what he thought might be equipment used in cell phone fraud. He then obtained a warrant to search the apartment for drugs, but did not mention the cell phone equipment. The officer called in an expert in phone fraud. While the officer searched for drugs, his expert tested a phone and seized other equipment.
Insufficient.
This was invalid under the plain view doctrine, because the incriminating nature of the phone and equipment had not been immediately apparent to the first officer.
Plain View: Specific knowledge Vs “Fishing expedition”
- While lawfully searching defendants apartment, officers seized clothing not listed in the warrant because they had a hunch that they might be useful later.
- Having a description of the specific clothes a suspect wore during a robbery, Officers looked into his car and saw clothing that matched the description given by the victim.
- Clothes turned out to be important, however at the time they were seized, the officers did not know their evidentiary value= fishing expedition. Bad.
- Officers immediately know the evidentiary value of the clothes at the time they were seized= Specific knowledge. Good.
May Officers rely on their expertise and experience in deciding whether an item is probably evidence?
Yes.
They may also take into account the suspects implausible explanation about how he obtained the property.
Do police have to obtain a warrant to scientifically test evidence seized in pain view?
No.
Ex. field testing seized drugs without a warrant = proper
