Seizure of evidence in plain view

Principle of Plain View

The principle of plain view has changed over time . In the case of Harris v . United

States , the Court declared the evidence taken as a result of opening the door of a car which is believed to be used by the offender (390 U .S 234 . In this case the plain view doctrine was used upon a card which was plainly viewed when the police officer opened the door of a car which was searched without a valid warrant . The rule , then , is relaxed because the mere opening

of the car 's door without a warrant is not considered a violation of the Fourth Amendment

The plain view doctrine , however , developed in the case of Coolidge v New Hampshire (403 U .S . 469 . In this case , the court stressed the requirement of a valid warrant which is issued by a neutral and impartial magistrate (403 U .S . 469 . The warrant having issued by the Attorney General made the search warrant invalid . Since the warrant was invalid , the incidental seizure of evidences in plain view was also declared invalid . In here , the court established the condition of the plain view doctrine . In that evidences taken in plain view be acceptable in court , it must be taken inadvertently and the officer seizing it should have a lawful right to be in the place being searched (403 U .S . 469

However , the principle set in the Coolidge case was changed in the case of Horton v . California (496...