![Sample our Social Sciences journals, sign in here to start your FREE access for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/110822/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Social-Sciences.jpg"})
The plain view doctrine allows police officers to seize contraband they see without first obtaining a search warrant. It is one of many exceptions to the warrant requirement. Since the exception was first announced in 1971, the Supreme Court and lower federal courts and state courts have attempted to apply its rationale to situations involving the use of senses other than sight – such as the senses of touch, smell, and hearing. In this paper, we review the development of the plain view exception and its expansion to ‘plain touch,’ ‘plain smell,’ and ‘plain hearing’ situations. We analyze and categorize the decision of the lower federal courts – both the Court of Appeals and the District Court – in an effort to provide an overview of the status of the law.
Notes
1. This paper does not examine the decisions of state courts. There are a number of state court decisions, and these would provide an excellent source of data for another paper. We restrict our inquiry here, however, to the federal courts. We do this in the interest of space, and in recognition of the fact that the most likely avenue to the Supreme Court is a recognized conflict of the federal Courts of Appeal. Thus it is federal cases that we find most relevant to our inquiry.