One exception to the fourth amendment warrant requirement is the consent search, in which police officers must have the consent of a person who has common authority over the premises. A recent Supreme Court decision upheld the validity of apparent authority to consent. The plain view seizure of evidence concept has three components: (1) that the police officers have a right to be in the location of the evidence, (2) that the evidentiary nature of the items must be immediately apparent, and (3) that the discovery must be inadvertent. However, the Supreme Court recently struck down this third requirement. Search warrants are authorized based on probable cause and "disappearing" probable cause. Although the Supreme Court has not ruled on the validity of "sneak and peek" warrants, in which officers make a clandestine entry and look at evidence without seizing anything tangible, a Federal appellate court has upheld the use of such warrants. Evidence observed during an illegal premises entry to arrest a suspect will not be admissible, even if in plain view. Various courts have also ruled on the permissibility of seizing evidence during protective sweeps and searches incident to arrest. 39 notes