Author Question: To what extent is inadvertency relevant in the plain view context? What will be an ideal ... (Read 101 times)

jlmhmf · **on:** Aug 24, 2018

To what extent is inadvertency relevant in the plain view context?

What will be an ideal response?

Question 2

In discussions of the Fourth Amendment, items like binoculars, flashlights, electronic beepers, and heat detectors are known as ___________________ ___________________ .

Fill in the blank(s) with correct word

jaaaaaaa · **Reply #1 on:** Aug 24, 2018

Answer to Question 1

The role of inadvertency in the plain view determination has received considerable attention.
The original position of the Supreme Court in Coolidge was that an object seized under the plain view doctrine must not have been anticipated by the police. For example, assume that a police officer obtains a warrant to search a suspect's home for the proceeds from a robbery. Assume further that the officer expects to find guns in the house but does not state in the warrant that guns will be sought. If, during the search, the officer finds guns, under the Supreme Court's old ruling, the guns will not be admissible because the officers expected to find them. This limit on the plain view doctrine came to be known as the inadvertency requirement. The rationale was that an officer who anticipates discovering evidence of a crime should seek prior judicial authorization (a warrant). Further, theFourth Amendment's particularity requirement would be compromised if general searches were permitted.

Answer to Question 2

enhancement devices