The plain view doctrine has three requirements that must be met before the evidence can be introduced as evidence. These three requirements are that the officer has to be aware of the item through the use of sight, he must be legally in the place from which the evidence is seen, and it must be immediately apparent that the evidence is subject to seizure. Any object falling under plain view of a police officer and who has a right to be in a position to have that view of the item it can be seized and introduce as evidence There are a few ways the officer could be there legally which are; while serving a search warrant, while in pursuit of a suspect, entry with a valid consent, and while making a valid arrest. The last requirement is item must be immediately seized. The items seized are only admissible as evidence if all three requirements are met. The Plain View Doctrine is not covered in the fourth amendment. The plain view doctrine applies in a state of law and in places where the police have a legal right. All of these searches and the reasons fall under the persuasive and influential. I believe the Plain view doctrine was created to assist officers in their daily duties while on patrol. Most people know their constitutional rights but some take them to the extreme when trying to win court cases. The Plain View Doctrine allows law enforcement officers to search and seize evidence that is in plain sight from a location that are allowed to be. If during a traffic stop, an officer sees drugs inside the vehicle from his position standing by the driver’s side window, then he or she would be permitted, without a search warrant, to seize the contraband. This doctrine would also apply if the officer was on patrol and saw a crime being committed through a window of a home. The officer could enter that residence without the need to secure a warrant. The 4th Amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America protects an individu