NCJ Number
131671
Journal
Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology Volume: 81 Issue: 4 Dated: (Winter 1991) Pages: 819-840
Date Published
1991
Length
22 pages
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