LS305-01 Constitutional Law Unit 5 assignment

S 443 91 sct 2022 29 led2d 564 1971 the state asserts

Info icon This preview shows pages 5–6. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
, 403 U.S. 443, 91 S.Ct. 2022, 29 L.Ed.2d 564 (1971). The state asserts that Skinrood's warrantless search was justified, because, when he first saw the plastic bag, it was in plain sight; hence, the “plain view doctrine” applied. In certain situations, police may seize, without a warrant, evidence that is in plain view. In Horton v. California , 496 U.S. 128, 136-37, 110 S.Ct. 2301, 110 L.Ed.2d 112 (1990), the United States Supreme Court has ruled that, for the state to justify its search under the plain view doctrine, it must prove that three conditions have been satisfied: (1) that police “did not violate the Fourth Amendment in arriving at the place from which the evidence could be plainly viewed,” id. at 136, 110 S.Ct. 2301; (2) that the searching officer had a lawful right of access to the evidence itself, id. at 137, 110 S.Ct. 2301; and (3) that the incriminating character of the evidence seized was immediately apparent, id. at 136, 110 S.Ct. 2301. Also, a search warrant is not required for a valid search when owner authorizes it. While a
Image of page 5

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
LS305-01 Constitutional Law Unit 5 assignment warrantless search and seizure inside a dwelling is presumptively unreasonable, such “a search is not unreasonable within the meaning of the Fourth Amendment when lawful consent to the search is given.” State v. Smith , 346 N.C. 794, 798, 488 S.E.2d 210, 213 (1997); see also N.C. Gen.Stat. § 15A-221(a) (1997) (officer may conduct warrantless search and seizure if consent is given). “Consent to search, freely and intelligently given, renders competent the evidence thus obtained.” State v. Frank , 284 N.C. 137, 143, 200 S.E.2d 169, 174 (1973). “ ‘Knock and talk’ is a procedure utilized by law enforcement officers to obtain a consent to search when they lack the probable cause necessary to obtain a search warrant.” Smith , 346 N.C. at 800, 488 S.E.2d at 214.
Image of page 6
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.
  • Fall '12
  • UNKNOWN
  • Supreme Court of the United States, First Amendment to the United States Constitution, Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution, Constitutional Law Unit, LS305-01 Constitutional Law

{[ snackBarMessage ]}

What students are saying

  • Left Quote Icon

    As a current student on this bumpy collegiate pathway, I stumbled upon Course Hero, where I can find study resources for nearly all my courses, get online help from tutors 24/7, and even share my old projects, papers, and lecture notes with other students.

    Student Picture

    Kiran Temple University Fox School of Business ‘17, Course Hero Intern

  • Left Quote Icon

    I cannot even describe how much Course Hero helped me this summer. It’s truly become something I can always rely on and help me. In the end, I was not only able to survive summer classes, but I was able to thrive thanks to Course Hero.

    Student Picture

    Dana University of Pennsylvania ‘17, Course Hero Intern

  • Left Quote Icon

    The ability to access any university’s resources through Course Hero proved invaluable in my case. I was behind on Tulane coursework and actually used UCLA’s materials to help me move forward and get everything together on time.

    Student Picture

    Jill Tulane University ‘16, Course Hero Intern