NCJ Number
125065
Date Published
1990
Length
10 pages
Annotation
In the case, Horton v. California, the issue of discovery of inadvertent items by police is examined.
Abstract
In this case the items seized from Horton's home were discovered during a lawful search authorized by a valid warrant. When they were discovered, it was immediately apparent to the officer that they constituted incriminating evidence. He had probable cause, not only to obtain a warrant to search for the stolen property, but also to believe that the weapons and handguns had been used in the crime he was investigating. The search was authorized by the warrant; the seizure was authorized by the plain view doctrine. The refusal to suppress the evidence found in the petitioner's home was affirmed by the California Court of Appeal. The Court relied on the California Supreme Court's decision in North v. Superior Court in which it is determined that the seizure of an object in plain view does not involve an intrusion on privacy. If the interest in privacy has been invaded, the violation must have occurred before the object came into plain view and there is no need for an inadvertence limitation on seizures to condemn it. The prohibition against general searches and general warrants serves primarily as a protection against unjustified intrusions of privacy.