What are the three parts of a plain view search?

• A. Officer must be lawfully present, must be in plain sight and that the item must be incriminating in nature.
• B. Officer must have a warrant, the item must be incriminating, and the search must be at night.
• C. The item must be in plain sight, the suspect must consent, and the officer must be in uniform.
• D. The officer must smell contraband, see the item, and have a documented search warrant.

Answer: (A)

The main concept being tested is how a plain view search allows evidence to be seized without a warrant. This only works if three conditions are met: the officer is lawfully present where the observation occurs; the item is seen in plain view, meaning no covert or hidden viewing is needed; and the incriminating nature of the item is immediately apparent to the officer at the moment it’s seen.

First, the officer must be lawfully present. If they aren’t legally allowed to be in the location, the sighting doesn’t justify a seizure, even if the object seems suspicious.

Second, the item must be in plain view. The officer cannot have to move things, touch anything, or engage in any search beyond what they’re already entitled to do; it must be readily observable from a place the officer is allowed to be.

Third, the incriminating nature must be immediately apparent. The officer must be able to tell, without further investigation, that the item is contraband or evidence of a crime. If further examination or manipulation is required, plain view does not apply.

So, when all three are satisfied—lawful presence, plain view, and immediate incriminating nature—the item can be seized without a warrant.

Why the other scenarios don’t fit: requiring a warrant or nighttime conditions goes beyond the plain view doctrine, which does not demand those elements. Consent or a uniform, or smelling contraband, are not part of the three-part test either; plain view focuses on lawful presence, visibility, and immediate recognizability of incriminating nature.