The Plain View Doctrine in Nebraska: State v. Holloman, 197 Neb. 139, 248 N.W.2d 15 (1976)

Authors

Richard Birch, University of Nebraska College of Law

Abstract

The Supreme Court of the United States has held that the fourth amendment of the United States Constitution establishes a preference for searches under warrant. There are, however, constitutionally recognized exceptions to this requirement. The most recent of these exceptions is the "plain view" doctrine. Under this doctrine, a law enforcement officer's seizure of objects does not constitute a "search" for purposes of the fourth amendment's prohibition against "unreasonable searches and seizures" when the officer, after a prior valid intrusion, inadvertently views an object immediately apparent as evidence. Rather, the seizure is held as having come about as the result of a mere observation. State v. Holloman is the most recent Nebraska case dealing with the plain view doctrine. This article will deal with the Holloman decision in relation to the requirement of the plain view doctrine that an object be "immediately apparent" as evidence.

Recommended Citation

Richard Birch, The Plain View Doctrine in Nebraska: State v. Holloman, 197 Neb. 139, 248 N.W.2d 15 (1976), 57 Neb. L. Rev. 209 (1978)
Available at: https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/nlr/vol57/iss1/10