How have courts interpreted the "plain view" doctrine in the context of search and seizure cases?
California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from People v. Arno, 153 Cal.Rptr. 624, 90 Cal.App.3d 505 (Cal. App. 1979):
"Apart from the trespass idea, these rely on the 'plain view' doctrine. The basis of this theory was recently expressed in Harris v. United States, 390 U.S. 234, 236, 88 S.Ct. 992, 993, 19 L.Ed.2d 1067 (1968), as follows: 'It has long been settled that objects falling in the plain view of an officer who has a right to be in the position to have that view are subject to seizure and may be introduced in evidence.' "
5 In a footnote at this point the court states:
"The most advanced legal research software ever built."
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.
