You are to read each scenario below and answer the questions included in each scenario. This is to be ONE page, but you should include a response for each scenario that is at least one page in length. Feel free to use headings to separate the parts.
Remember to incorporate the elements, or requirements, of the Plain View Doctrine into your discussions and to submit this in APA formatting.
A. In United States. v. Riley, 488 U.S. 445 (1989), the U.S. Supreme Court held in a plurality opinion that police observations of marijuana from a helicopter flying at a distance of four hundred (400) feet above defendant’s greenhouse located in the curtilage of his home did not violate defendant’s reasonable expectation of privacy. As a result, this surveillance did not constitute a “search” under the Fourth Amendment, and no warrant was required. How would you argue that this did violate the home owner’s reasonable expectation of privacy? What if the police instead used a thermal imaging camera to see inside the home to see the use of lighting usually associated with growing marijuana plants? How might the use of a drone in this scenario impact your determination?
B. In United States v. McLevain, 310 F.3d 434 (6th Cir. 2002), officers executing a search warrant for a residence authorizing the seizure of two individuals, one of whom did not live at the residence, found the following items in plain view: a twist tie and a cut cigarette filter under the bed in the master bedroom; a spoon with residue on a tackle box in a sink in the garage (an officer seized this residue at the scene and conducted a test to determine if it was an illegal drug); and a prescription bottle, with no label, filled with a clear liquid that looked like water (the bottle was found on a mantle in the home). The court did not admit any of the items as illegal contraband. Why? Change the facts presented here such that the items seized WOULD be admissible pursuant to the Plain View Doctrine.