Plain View Doctrine (PVD)

Great Essays
1. the Plain View Doctrine (PVD) The police officers lawfully obtained evidence from Archer’s dining room under the PVD because the officer was in a place where he had a right to be and saw accessible property that was recognized as the candelabra. The Supreme Court has held that even if there is no warrant, obtaining evidence is always reasonable under the Fourth Amendment, if (1) the police entrance to the place to be searched is valid and (2) the PVD prong test is satisfied: if an officer is in a place where he has a right to be and sees accessible property that is recognized as contraband, an officer may seize the evidence. Coolidge, 403 U.S. at 467. Moreover, the modern trend of the PVD is lenient towards the compliance to the three prongs …show more content…
Arizona v. Hicks, 480 U.S. 321, 325 (1987). In Hicks, the officers, responding to a shooting, moved a stereo to view and recorded the serial numbers. Id. The Supreme Court held that recording the numbers was allowed, however, what was not reasonable was the action of moving the stereo in order to make the serial numbers in plain view. Id. Another case that that determined the object is not contraband, is Nicholas v. State. In this case, the officers noticed photographic negatives in plain view, however the officers had no knowledge or suspicion that these negatives evidenced an illegality until the officer turned on the lights, held the negatives up to the light, and after looking closely he determined that the negatives contained evidence of a crime. Nicholas v. State, 502 S.W.2d 169, 257, (Tex. Crim. …show more content…
(C.R. 12, Or. ¶ 14). Even if Detective Gillette would have not known right away that the object underneath the blanket was the candelabra, Detective Friggis’ touch of the irregular protrusions, with twisted branches and thorns, would have sufficed to identify the covered candelabra, since he was at the dining room when the touch happened and the touch of the unique protrusions of the mesquite candelabra made it immediately apparent to officer Friggis. (C.R. 12, Or. ¶ 14). Finally, the officers rightfully decided that obtaining the stolen candelabra was a “major gain in effective law enforcement” since they had not found any other stolen art pieces and the candelabra is a clue to find the rest of the art stolen valued at $100, 000. (C.R. 13, Or. ¶

Related Documents

  • Improved Essays

    Issue One: Did Justice Anthopolous err in finding that the police detention of the Applicants and the vehicle was lawful and not arbitrary under s. 9 of the Charter? Justice Anthopolous was correct in finding that the detention of the vehicle and the occupants within did not violate section 9 of the charter of rights and freedoms (the right to not be arbitrarily detained) and the detention of the vehicle was lawful and not arbitrary, the detention of Alomar and Bell was the result of an ongoing investigation. Det. Martin stated that he believed he witnessed the sale of narcotics during his investigation of the anonymous drug tip, the police may detain a person for investigative purposes if their are reasonable grounds to suspect the individual…

    • 1629 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Coolidge V. S. 403 Essay

    • 610 Words
    • 3 Pages

    Most importantly, there was nothing dangerous inside the vehicle or contraband inside (“Coolidge v. New Hampshire 403 U.S. 443 (1971),” n.d.). It’s an odd case if you ask me. My only issue was that the attorney general obtained the warrant, which was the same guy in charge of the criminal prosecution and the investigation. That doesn’t seem fair to me. However, the vehicle situation is a little bit ridiculous and quite a stretch if you ask me.…

    • 610 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Superior Essays

    The Exclusionary Rule

    • 1087 Words
    • 5 Pages

    The Supreme Court ruled in favor of Fremont Weeks concluding that searching his residence without a warrant was unconstitutional and violating his fourth amendment rights. The United States Supreme Court decision would become the exclusionary rule barring the admission of evidence illegally obtained. The United States Supreme Court influenced the police by regulating how they conduct their searches in the future. A reasonable search is considered when the police have probable cause to believe that they can find evidence that you committed a crime and the judge may grant police a search warrant. Prior to Fremont Weeks case all of the evidence obtained regardless how it was seized was allowed all relevant evidence, regardless of how it was obtained.…

    • 1087 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Driver, 2015). This brought up a particular concern; exactly how much authority can a police officer distribute towards a public citizen who is recording them? Based on the details, Turner did not do anything to incite officers Grinald and Dyess. He simply recorded the police station from the opposite side of the street without obstructing the peace. Additionally, the district court did recognize Turner’s right to film and record the police – it was not clearly established, though.…

    • 930 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Which is known as “Hot Pursuit”. However, this is not the case when searching the cell phone because the Det. Did not have any evidence of their handgun or any reason to suspect something in her photos and therefore Det. Colabello should not have accessed Ms. Alomar’s photos. In the precedent case R. v. Macooh, the trial judge clearly states “the officer 's entry into the dwelling house in “hot pursuit” of a person suspected of a breach of summary legislation contained in a provincial enactment, as opposed to an indictable offence, was unlawful, and that the arrest of the person within the premises was therefore also unlawful.” From this statement, one can conclude that just like in the Alomar and Bell case, there was not enough legal evidence to legally obtain…

    • 1144 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Arizona case, highlight the requirements of a search and seizure under the fourth amendment . In this case , the supreme court describes that police officers cannot search a vehicle without a warrant unless the police officers believe that the arrestee has had access to the vehicle after the was arrested. Yet, if the officer is certain that the arrestee had access to the car after been placed under arrests and it contains evidence. This is the only exception the Supreme court establish a search in a car passenger compartment. But in Gant V. Arizona there was no evidence that the police need to search because Gant did not have access to the car after been detained.…

    • 671 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Wilson Vs Arkansas

    • 1024 Words
    • 5 Pages

    In this case, once Ray declared that he was going to kill Janay. This can be considered as an exigent circumstance which is when officers immediately take action in order to make an arrest. In Brigham City, Utah v Charles Stuart, the court believed that under exigent circumstances, police should be allowed to enter a suspect’s home without a warrant. This established imminent danger as one of these circumstances. In Wilson v Arkansas, the knock and announce rule was used because the plantiff’s home was searched without letting him know it was the police.…

    • 1024 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    This led the police to do a search on John Smith cell phone which was also done without a search warrant. In the case of Riley v. California the Supreme Court ruled that a cell phone could not be searched in connection with an arrest unless a warrant is obtain from a judge or there is consent. John Smith phone was search because he was arrested for the murder of Rhoda Dendrum. The police was looking for evidence to link John Smith to Rhoda and they found it on his phone. This wasn’t an Exigent circumstance John Smith was not in possession of his phone while he was in police custody therefore there was no emergency for officers to search it without a…

    • 866 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Linda Chavez describes to us the difference between profiling and racial profiling in her article, Everything isn 't Racial Profiling, she argues that profiling does not have to be used in a negative way, "But there are times when it makes sense to include race or national origin in a larger criminal profile"(576). Chavez is suggesting that United States authorities are allowed to profile people as long as it fits the characteristics of the suspect. This means that police officers are not racially profiling by arresting suspicious looking Hispanics when the victim described the suspect as Hispanic. Many times when we see a Caucasian officer ask a black man to pull over, we immediately go to conclusions and think, "wow he is racist", but that might not always be the case. Stephanie M. Wildman and Adrienne D. Davis described Racism, in their article, Making Systems of Privilege Visible, as being "defined by whites in terms of specific, discriminatory racist actions by others"(92).…

    • 1548 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Carmella Iacovetta Michigan Dept. of State Police v. Sitz, 496 U.S. 444 (1990) Facts: The state police of Michigan and its director set up a sobriety checkpoint with the sole intent of catching intoxicated drivers. An advisory committee was created that set up guidelines with well-defined procedures. A state road was selected for the pilot checkpoint. The guidelines stipulated that if the driver appeared to be intoxicated, an officer would pull them from the flow and check their license and registration.…

    • 845 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays