Final answer:
The plain view doctrine is used when officers are legally in a location and find evidence in plain view, allowing them to seize it without a warrant. This doctrine is constrained by legal precedents, such as the exclusionary rule, which prohibit the use of unlawfully obtained evidence in court.
Step-by-step explanation:
Application of the Plain View Doctrine
The plain view doctrine is applied by police officers when they are lawfully present at a location and discover evidence, contraband, or other items in plain view and it is immediately apparent that the items are subject to seizure. This doctrine allows for the seizure of items without a warrant.
It is typically applied when the officers are in a place they have the right to be, and the criminal nature of the item is clear without further intrusion. Two landmark cases that discuss the boundaries of search and seizure are Mapp v. Ohio, which gave rise to the exclusionary rule, and Terry v. Ohio, which allows for a stop and frisk based on reasonable suspicion. The Fifth Amendment rights, including protection against self-incrimination and the right to counsel during interrogation, are also considered when examining whether a search or seizure is lawful.