
The contraband in this case would not be considered “in plain view,” and would likely be excluded as evidence. For example, if there is drug paraphernalia sitting underneath a napkin, the police officer cannot move the napkin, see the item, then seize it. Such evidence – in order to truly fall under the plain view doctrine – must truly be right in plain sight. Not only that, but it may give him probable cause to arrest the individual in possession of the item. One of these exceptions is known as “plain view doctrine.” What this means is that, if a law enforcement officer is in a place where he has every right to be, and he sees property in plain view that is either contraband or evidence of a crime, then he may lawfully seize that property. If these actions are not authorized by a search warrant, they must fall into one of the law’s exceptions to the 4th Amendment on searches and seizures.

The plain view doctrine also permits certain seizures to be conducted without a warrant. For example, the plain view doctrine gives police officers the right to seize needles and bags of heroin that someone may have lying right out on the passenger seat during a routine traffic stop. The plain view doctrine refers to the concept that so long as criminal evidence or contraband is left out “in plain view,” officers conducting a legal search of a property are within their right to seize that evidence.

The doctrine that holds that any evidence or contraband that is out in plain sight may be seized by a police officer during an observation and without a warrant.
