Also known as: plain-view exception · plain view doctrine · plain view rule
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
A doctrine permitting officers who are lawfully present to seize an item without a warrant when its incriminating character is immediately apparent. The officer must possess probable cause to believe the item is contraband or evidence of a crime. Manipulation of an object to reveal information such as a serial number constitutes a separate search requiring its own justification.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
During execution of a warrant for billing records, Detective Mason sees an expensive ultrasound probe on an open shelf in Lucas's clinic. Mason lifts and rotates the probe to read the serial number etched on the back, then seizes it after confirming it matches a unit reported stolen from a nearby hospital. Lucas moves to suppress the probe and the serial-number evidence.
After witnessing Leo assault a cameraman and flee with a camera bag, officers follow him into Dana's loft without a warrant. While lawfully inside they observe a stolen camera and handgun lying openly on a table and seize them. Dana moves to suppress the items as products of an unlawful search.
Officers enter a home with consent and observe clothing matching the description of items taken from a murder victim lying openly on the floor. They seize the clothing without a warrant and later charge the homeowner. The homeowner moves to suppress the clothing under the Fourth Amendment.
While executing a warrant for weapons and proceeds of a robbery, officers see a stereo and other items they recognize as stolen property sitting in plain view on shelves. They seize the items even though the warrant did not list them. The homeowner moves to suppress the seized property.
The officer must be lawfully present in the location from which the item is viewed. The item must be in plain view rather than discovered through an additional search. The incriminating character of the item must be immediately apparent, meaning the officer has probable cause to believe it is contraband or evidence of a crime.
Supporting sources
…evidence of the crime would be found in petitioner's home and automobile. The seizure of the clothing was justified under the plain view doctrine once the officers were lawfully in the home with the consent of petitioner's wife. With respect to the automobile, I believe the warrant was valid. The Attorney General, while involved in…
…determine whether the search was pretextual. Pp. 137-142. (c) In this case, the seizure of the weapons was authorized by the plain view doctrine
…once McDonald observed the glassine envelopes in plain view
…the SUV, he saw the revolver in plain view
…valid under Terry , but found the seizure of the cocaine to be unconstitutional. The court expressly refused "to extend the plain view doctrine
No. Probable cause may rest on the officer's training and experience recognizing distinctive packaging commonly used for drugs even when the container is opaque. Courts have upheld seizures of taped balls, knotted balloons, and film canisters when specialized knowledge supplied the required probable cause.
Supporting sources
Yes. When the serial number is not visible without manipulation, lifting or rotating the object constitutes a separate search. Officers must already possess probable cause that the item is evidence or contraband before moving it. Reasonable suspicion is insufficient.
Supporting sources
No. The Supreme Court has held that the discovery need not be inadvertent. Officers may seize evidence they recognize while executing a warrant for other items so long as the three core requirements of lawful presence, plain view, and immediate apparent incriminating character are met.