Warrantless Exceptions: Plain View Doctrine

Question 1

NY v. Class (This is about seizure of evidence)

Answer 1

driver pulled over for speeding had no reasonable expectation of privacy in his VIN number, located on inside of door in older cars, required by fed law to be placed in plain view of someone outside car, officer could not see VIN from the car so he entered car for limited purpose of getting that number, moved papers on the dash that were obscuring the VIN and he unveiled a gun from under seat - Class tried to suppress gun but Court said the officer was allowed to seize gun b/c of plain view doctrine → since officer saw gun from a position he was allowed to be and from which he could legally gain physical control over it

Question 2

Arizona v. Hicks

Answer 2

A bullet shot through floor of Hick’s apt and injured a man living below. While police were lawfully searching apt., officer noticed expensive stereo. Suspecting it had been stolen, officer moved it so he could see serial numbers, reported serial numbers, learned it had been stolen and seized it. Based on serial numbers, later determined some other stuff had been stolen and warrant was issued.

Is PC necessary to invoke Plain View Doctrine? Court says YES. Reasonable suspicion is not enough. Officers needed PC to search/seize the stereo equipment.

• Mere recording of serial numbers from the stereos did NOT constitute a seizure - BUT moving stereo DID CONSTITUTE A SEARCH → “taking action unrelated to the objectives of the authorized intrusion, which exposed to view concealed portions of the apartment or its contents, did produce a NEW INVASION OF RESPONDENT’S PRIVACY UNJUSTIFIED BY THE EXIGENT CIRCUMSTANCE THAT VALIDATED THE ENTRY”

Question 3

Plain View Doctrine: 3 conditions.

Answer 3

Police can search/seize evidence in plain view on three conditions.

In addition to being in plain view:
1) Police got there legally/officer lawfully there (legal intrusion)
2) Police can gain physical control of the evidence (potential physical control)
3) Police have Probably Cause that item is evidence of a crime (PC)

All 3? Then Police can seize under the plain view doctrine.
*Note: these steps are the same whether #1 is answered affirmatively due to the existence of a warrant or because there is sufficient justification for warrantless activity, like PC + exigent circumstances. [NY v Class, 1986]