Pretext & Plain View Flashcards
When an officer has probable cause to believe a traffic violation has occurred, is the Fourth Amendment violated if his primary reason for pulling over and detaining the motorist is not to enforce the traffic laws?
No. When there is probable cause that a traffic offense has occurred, the officer’s subjective motives for detaining the motorist do not invalidate the officer’s actions under the Fourth Amendment. If the defendant believes he has been targeted by the police because of his race, as Whren suggests, his remedy lies in the Equal Protection Clause, not the Fourth Amendment. Here, the driver of the car committed a traffic offense and the officers were entitled to pull the car over regardless of whether or not a reasonable officer who had not observed the suspicious activity would have taken the time or chosen to do so based solely on the traffic offenses.
Under the plain view doctrine, must the discovery of an item be inadvertent for police to make a warrantless seizure of the item?
No. Under the Fourth Amendment the police can seize an item that is in plain view without a warrant, even if finding the item was not inadvertent, so long as the police have the legal right to be where the item is found.
Is probable cause necessary for an officer to invoke the plain view doctrine?
Yes. The plain view doctrine demands that probable cause exist before an officer may search or seize a piece of evidence. The Fourth Amendment protections against unreasonable searches and seizures are both due equal protections and must be treated the same under the plain view doctrine. As such, just as the plain view doctrine allows police to seize evidence without a warrant when they observe incriminating evidence in plain view, it permits officers to search items by moving them for closer inspection.
