Please number the questions. They are not done in essay form. No references needed. 1. The focus of The Plain View Doctrine is on legal seizures of evidence that is in plain view of an officer, and exceptions to the warrant requirement. Explain your choices in this scenario by addressing the following questions: Which principles should officers follow when they decide whether or not to seize an item they can plainly see while on patrol or conducting a search? Is there a good protocol to keep in mind as a basic matter? How might these answers change based on differing sets of circumstances? 2. The plain view doctrine specifically requires that evidence be seen by an officer and not perceived in other ways (such as when an officer smells marijuana in a room). Why, then, do you think the courts have also adopted case law surrounding a “plain touch” exception? Do you think the “plain touch” and “plain view” doctrines should simply be rolled into a more general exception that would allow officers to use any of their senses to perceive potential evidence? Or are there specific situations that make you think that the law is correct as is? Explain your reasoning.
Hide
