Fourth Amendment -- Eliminating the Inadvertent Discovery Requirement for Seizures Under the Plain View Doctrine

• NCJ Number: 131671
• Journal: Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology Volume: 81 Issue: 4 Dated: (Winter 1991) Pages: 819-840
• Author(s): R J Hall
• Date Published: 1991
• Length: 22 pages
• Publication Format: Article
• Publication Type: Legislation/Policy Analysis
• Language: English
• Country: United States of America

Annotation

In Horton v. California, the Supreme Court held that the plain view doctrine does not require inadvertent discovery leading to a seizure of evidence. The Court concluded that law enforcement is better served without the inadvertency requirement and that inadvertent discovery does not necessarily contravene the protections guaranteed by the fourth amendment.

Abstract

The author agrees with the Court's decision, arguing that the inadvertency doctrine imposes substantial risks and costs on law enforcement, while not furthering fourth amendment interests which are protected by general prohibitions against search and seizure. The benefits of balancing constitutional rights and law enforcement needs will outweigh any possible abuse of the plain view doctrine through pretextual searches. 134 notes