× Didn't find what you were looking for? Ask a question
Top Posters
Since Sunday
c
6
r
4
c
3
m
3
h
3
1
3
n
3
s
3
d
3
c
3
r
3
e
3
Home Q & A Board Humanities Legal Studies
New Topic  
Silvertxpia Silvertxpia
wrote...
Go to Answer
Posts: 599
Rep: 1 0
6 years ago
For an item to be lawfully seized under the plain view doctrine, it must be immediately apparent to the officer that the item is subject to seizure. This means that the officer must
 
  a. Be absolutely certain the item is contraband.
  b. Be reasonably certain that the item is contraband.
  c. Have probable cause that the item is contraband.
  d. Have a hunch that the item is contraband.


(Question #2) In which case did the Supreme Court create the immediately apparent requirement for a valid plain view seizure?
 
  a. Arizona v. Hicks
  b. Horton v. California
  c. Minnesota v. Dickerson
  d. Coolidge v. New Hampshire


(Question #3) The Supreme Court first permitted warrantless hot pursuit searches in:
 
  a. Chimel v. California.
  b. Sibron v. New York.
  c. Warden v. Hayden.
  d. Welsh v. Wisconsin.
Read 66 times
2 Replies
Replies
Answer verified by a subject expert
KdayKday
wrote...
#1
Posts: 369
Rep: 9 0
6 years ago
Sign in or Sign up in seconds to unlock everything for free
1

Related Topics

Silvertxpia Author
wrote...
#2
6 years ago
Makes more sense now, TY
New Topic      
Quick Reply
Explore
Post your homework questions and get free online help from our incredible volunteers
  1270 People Browsing
Start New Topic Take the Tour CoursesNew Study Tools Topics Trending Browse by Textbook
Related Images
  
 226
  
 1161
  
 347
Your Opinion
Who's your favorite biologist?
Votes: 608
Previous poll results: How often do you eat-out per week?