plain view doctrine in Connecticut

59 Connecticut opinions name it 3 courts 1973–2025 2 in the last five years

The cases below were cited by Connecticut courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.

Followed or applied (25)

Case	Followed	Cited
Coolidge v. New Hampshiregreen scotus · 1971 · cited in 15 Connecticut opinions naming this issue, 1973–2019 2 sentences 2019"The plain view doctrine is based upon the premise that the police need not ignore incriminating evidence in plain view while they are ... entitled to be in a position to view the items seized." (Internal quotation marks omitted.) State v. Arokium , 143 Conn. App. 419 , 433, 71 A.3d 569 , cert. denied, 310 Conn. 904 , 75 A.3d 31 (2013) ; see also Coolidge v. New Hampshire , 403 U.S. 443 , 464-73, 91 S.Ct. 2022 , 29 L.Ed.2d 564 (1971) ; State v. Ruth , 181 Conn. 187 , 193, 435 A.2d 3 (1980). 2019"The plain view doctrine is based upon the premise that the police need not ignore incriminating evidence in plain view while they are ... entitled to be in a position to view the items seized." (Internal quotation marks omitted.) State v. Arokium , 143 Conn. App. 419 , 433, 71 A.3d 569 , cert. denied, 310 Conn. 904 , 75 A.3d 31 (2013) ; see also Coolidge v. New Hampshire , 403 U.S. 443 , 464-73, 91 S.Ct. 2022 , 29 L.Ed.2d 564 (1971) ; State v. Ruth , 181 Conn. 187 , 193, 435 A.2d 3 (1980).	8	15
United States v. Vincent Pacelli and Demetrios Papadakosgreen ca2 · 1973 · cited in 3 Connecticut opinions naming this issue, 1978–1989 2 sentences 1989It is well established that “where a police officer has a warrant to search a given area for specified objects, and in the course of the search comes across some other article of incriminating character the property is seizable under the plain view doctrine.” United States v. Pocelli, 470 F.2d 67, 70 (2d Cir. 1972), cert. denied, 410 U.S. 983 , 93 S. Ct. 1501 , 36 L. 1986The state con tends that the seizure of these items was lawful under the plain view doctrine. “ ‘ “[Wjhere a police officer has a warrant to search a given area for specified objects, and in the course of the search comes across some other article of incriminating character, the property is seizable under the plain view doctrine.” United, States v. Pacelli, 470 F.2d 67, 70 (2d Cir. 1972), cert. denied, 410 U.S. 983 , 93 S. Ct. 1501 , 36 L.	3	3
Arizona v. Hicksgreen scotus · 1987 · cited in 6 Connecticut opinions naming this issue, 1989–2000 2 sentences 1999I The “immediately apparent” requirement of the plain view exception is satisfied if, at the time of discovery of the contraband or evidence, there is “probable cause to associate the property in plain view with criminal activity without further investigation.” State v. Reddick, supra, 207 Conn. 335 , citing Arizona v. Hicks, 480 U.S. 321, 324-27 , 107 S. Ct. 1149 , 94 L. 1999I The “immediately apparent” requirement of the plain view exception is satisfied if, at the time of discovery of the contraband or evidence, there is “probable cause to associate the property in plain view with criminal activity without further investigation.” State v. Reddick, supra, 207 Conn. 335 , citing Arizona v. Hicks, 480 U.S. 321, 324-27 , 107 S. Ct. 1149 , 94 L.	2	6
Horton v. Californiagreen scotus · 1990 · cited in 4 Connecticut opinions naming this issue, 1992–2001 2 sentences 2001Under the plain view doctrine, “if police are lawfully in a position from which they view an object, if its incriminating character is immediately apparent, and if the officers have a lawful right of access to the object, they may seize it without a warrant.” Minnesota v. Dickerson, supra, 508 U.S. 375 ; see Horton v. California, 496 U.S. 128, 136-37 , 110 S. Ct. 2301 , 110 L. 2001Under the plain view doctrine, “if police are lawfully in a position from which they view an object, if its incriminating character is immediately apparent, and if the officers have a lawful right of access to the object, they may seize it without a warrant.” Minnesota v. Dickerson, supra, 508 U.S. 375 ; see Horton v. California, 496 U.S. 128, 136-37 , 110 S. Ct. 2301 , 110 L.	2	4
Harris v. United Statesgreen scotus · 1968 · cited in 2 Connecticut opinions naming this issue, 1998–1998	2	2
State v. Hobsongreen connappct · 1986 · cited in 5 Connecticut opinions naming this issue, 1986–1989 2 sentences 1986“The plain view doctrine may be invoked to validate the seizure of contraband or stolen goods not mentioned in a warrant where two requirements are satisifed: (1) the initial intrusion which enabled the police to view the items was lawful; and (2) the police had probable cause to believe that the items were contraband or stolen goods.” (Footnote omitted.) State v. Hobson, 8 Conn. App. 13, 18 , 511 A.2d 348 (1986). 1986“The plain view doctrine may be invoked to validate the seizure of contraband or stolen goods not mentioned in a warrant where two requirements are satisifed: (1) the initial intrusion which enabled the police to view the items was lawful; and (2) the police had probable cause to believe that the items were contraband or stolen goods.” (Footnote omitted.) State v. Hobson, 8 Conn. App. 13, 18 , 511 A.2d 348 (1986).	1	5
State v. Ruscoegreen conn · 1989 · cited in 4 Connecticut opinions naming this issue, 1992–2000 2 sentences 2000State v. Ruscoe , 212 Conn. 223 , 237-8 . 1992Because the cocaine seized in this case constitutes contraband; see State v. Hamilton, supra, 701, citing State v. Ruscoe, supra, 238 ; the protection of our state constitution would be unavailing to the defendant even if we were to find that article first, § 7, requires an inadvertence limitation on the plain view doctrine.	1	4
State v. Magnanogreen conn · 1987 · cited in 3 Connecticut opinions naming this issue, 1998–2001 2 sentences 2001See State v. Magnano , 204 Conn. 259 , 267-71 (1987). 2001See State v. Magnano , 204 Conn. 259 , 267-71 (1987).	1	3
Eling v. Jonesgreen scotus · 1987 · cited in 3 Connecticut opinions naming this issue, 1989–1989 2 sentences 1989See State v. Hobson, 8 Conn. App. 13, 18 , 511 A.2d 348 , cert. denied, 201 Conn. 808 , 515 A.2d 379 (1986), cert. denied, 480 U.S. 917 , 107 S. Ct. 1370 , 94 L. 1989Ed. 2d 178 (1973); State v. Hobson, 8 Conn. App. 13, 18 , 511 A.2d 348 (1986), cert. denied, 480 U.S. 917 , 107 S. Ct. 370 , 94 L.	1	3
State v. Krausegreen conn · 1972 · cited in 2 Connecticut opinions naming this issue, 1995–2005 2 sentences 1995Although Connecticut has also adopted the plain view doctrine; State v. Krause, 163 Conn. 76, 82-83 , 301 A.2d 234 (1972); we do not find it an apt analogy to the situation before us. 1995Although Connecticut has also adopted the plain view doctrine; State v. Krause, 163 Conn. 76, 82-83 , 301 A.2d 234 (1972); we do not find it an apt analogy to the situation before us.	1	2
Texas v. Browngreen scotus · 1983 · cited in 2 Connecticut opinions naming this issue, 1989–1998	1	2
State v. Reddickgreen conn · 1988 · cited in 2 Connecticut opinions naming this issue, 1989–1992	1	2
State v. Federicigreen conn · 1979 · cited in 2 Connecticut opinions naming this issue, 1990–1992	1	2
State v. Altruigreen conn · 1982 · cited in 2 Connecticut opinions naming this issue, 1988–1992	1	2
Stewart v. New Prairie Classroom Teachers Ass'ngreen scotus · 1987 · cited in 2 Connecticut opinions naming this issue, 1989–1989	1	2
Kyllo v. United Statesgreen scotus · 2001 · cited in 1 Connecticut opinions naming this issue, 2016–2016	1	1
State v. Dickersongreen iowa · 1981 · cited in 1 Connecticut opinions naming this issue, 2016–2016	1	1
United States v. Cecil Kenton Eppersongreen ca4 · 1972 · cited in 1 Connecticut opinions naming this issue, 2016–2016	1	1
Tramel v. United Statesgreen scotus · 1972 · cited in 1 Connecticut opinions naming this issue, 2016–2016	1	1
Rhoden v. United Statesgreen scotus · 1972 · cited in 1 Connecticut opinions naming this issue, 2016–2016	1	1
Simms v. Seamangreen conn · 2011 · cited in 1 Connecticut opinions naming this issue, 2013–2013	1	1
United States v. Angelosgreen ca10 · 2006 · cited in 1 Connecticut opinions naming this issue, 2009–2009	1	1
Liu v. Credit Suisse First Boston Corp.green scotus · 2006 · cited in 1 Connecticut opinions naming this issue, 2009–2009	1	1
United States v. Thomas Frederick Johnstongreen ca9 · 1974 · cited in 1 Connecticut opinions naming this issue, 2009–2009	1	1
Illinois v. Andreasgreen scotus · 1983 · cited in 1 Connecticut opinions naming this issue, 2001–2001	1	1

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

Case	Negative	Cited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Connecticut. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (55)

Case	Cited	Years
State v. Ruth green conn · 1980 2 sentences 2019"The plain view doctrine is based upon the premise that the police need not ignore incriminating evidence in plain view while they are ... entitled to be in a position to view the items seized." (Internal quotation marks omitted.) State v. Arokium , 143 Conn. App. 419 , 433, 71 A.3d 569 , cert. denied, 310 Conn. 904 , 75 A.3d 31 (2013) ; see also Coolidge v. New Hampshire , 403 U.S. 443 , 464-73, 91 S.Ct. 2022 , 29 L.Ed.2d 564 (1971) ; State v. Ruth , 181 Conn. 187 , 193, 435 A.2d 3 (1980). 2019"The plain view doctrine is based upon the premise that the police need not ignore incriminating evidence in plain view while they are ... entitled to be in a position to view the items seized." (Internal quotation marks omitted.) State v. Arokium , 143 Conn. App. 419 , 433, 71 A.3d 569 , cert. denied, 310 Conn. 904 , 75 A.3d 31 (2013) ; see also Coolidge v. New Hampshire , 403 U.S. 443 , 464-73, 91 S.Ct. 2022 , 29 L.Ed.2d 564 (1971) ; State v. Ruth , 181 Conn. 187 , 193, 435 A.2d 3 (1980).	9	1992–2019
State v. Eady green conn · 1999 2 sentences 2018"The immediately apparent requirement of the plain view exception is satisfied if, at the time of discovery of the contraband or evidence, there is probable cause to associate the property in plain view with criminal activity without further investigation." (Internal quotation marks omitted.) State v. Eady , supra, 249 Conn. at 439 , 733 A.2d 112 ."[Our Connecticut courts] consistently have held that [t]he quantum of evidence necessary to establish probable cause exceeds mere suspicion, but is substantially less than that required for conviction.... 2018"The immediately apparent requirement of the plain view exception is satisfied if, at the time of discovery of the contraband or evidence, there is probable cause to associate the property in plain view with criminal activity without further investigation." (Internal quotation marks omitted.) State v. Eady , supra, 249 Conn. at 439 , 733 A.2d 112 ."[Our Connecticut courts] consistently have held that [t]he quantum of evidence necessary to establish probable cause exceeds mere suspicion, but is substantially less than that required for conviction....	7	1999–2018
Osorio de Escobar v. United States green scotus · 1999 2 sentences 2002Ed. 2d 564 (1971), the United States Supreme Court articulated what has become known as the plain view exception to the warrant requirement.” State v. Eady, 249 Conn. 431, 436 , 733 A.2d 112 , cert. denied, 528 U.S. 1030 , 120 S. Ct. 551 , 145 L. 2000In discussing the “immediately apparent” aspect of the plain view doctrine and its implicit probable cause requirement, our Supreme Court has stated that “ [w]hether a Fourth Amendment violation has occurred turns on an objective assessment of the officer’s actions in light of the facts and circumstances confronting him at the time . . . and not on the officer’s actual state of mind at the time the challenged action was taken . . . .” (Internal quotation marks omitted.) State v. Eady, 249 Conn. 431, 441 , 733 A.2d 112 (en banc), cert. denied, 528 U.S. 1030 , 120 S. Ct. 551 , 145 L.	5	2000–2018
Foster v. United States green scotus · 1999 2 sentences 2002Ed. 2d 564 (1971), the United States Supreme Court articulated what has become known as the plain view exception to the warrant requirement.” State v. Eady, 249 Conn. 431, 436 , 733 A.2d 112 , cert. denied, 528 U.S. 1030 , 120 S. Ct. 551 , 145 L. 2000In discussing the “immediately apparent” aspect of the plain view doctrine and its implicit probable cause requirement, our Supreme Court has stated that “ [w]hether a Fourth Amendment violation has occurred turns on an objective assessment of the officer’s actions in light of the facts and circumstances confronting him at the time . . . and not on the officer’s actual state of mind at the time the challenged action was taken . . . .” (Internal quotation marks omitted.) State v. Eady, 249 Conn. 431, 441 , 733 A.2d 112 (en banc), cert. denied, 528 U.S. 1030 , 120 S. Ct. 551 , 145 L.	5	2000–2018
Hooks v. Easley green scotus · 1999 2 sentences 2002Ed. 2d 564 (1971), the United States Supreme Court articulated what has become known as the plain view exception to the warrant requirement.” State v. Eady, 249 Conn. 431, 436 , 733 A.2d 112 , cert. denied, 528 U.S. 1030 , 120 S. Ct. 551 , 145 L. 2000In discussing the “immediately apparent” aspect of the plain view doctrine and its implicit probable cause requirement, our Supreme Court has stated that “ [w]hether a Fourth Amendment violation has occurred turns on an objective assessment of the officer’s actions in light of the facts and circumstances confronting him at the time . . . and not on the officer’s actual state of mind at the time the challenged action was taken . . . .” (Internal quotation marks omitted.) State v. Eady, 249 Conn. 431, 441 , 733 A.2d 112 (en banc), cert. denied, 528 U.S. 1030 , 120 S. Ct. 551 , 145 L.	5	2000–2018
State v. Brown green conn · 2006 2 sentences 2009Telephone toll records, rent/mortgage records, bank statements, records and account passbooks, receipts showing cash purchases (such as electronic equipment including [video cassette recorders], television sets, video cameras, cameras, computers, computer peripherals and storage [devices], gold and silver jewelry which are believed to have been purchased with money derived from the sale of narcotics, financial records and ‘[d]ata’, beepers, fax machines and telephone answering machines and stored messages contained either on tape or any other electronic format, safety deposit box keys and reco 2009Telephone toll records, rent/mortgage records, bank statements, records and account passbooks, receipts showing cash purchases (such as electronic equipment including [video cassette recorders], television sets, video cameras, cameras, computers, computer peripherals and storage [devices], gold and silver jewelry which are believed to have been purchased with money derived from the sale of narcotics, financial records and ‘[d]ata’, beepers, fax machines and telephone answering machines and stored messages contained either on tape or any other electronic format, safety deposit box keys and reco	5	2007–2018
State v. Cobb green conn · 1999 2 sentences 2025The plain view doctrine is ‘‘based upon the premise that the police need not ignore incriminating evidence in plain view while they are operating within the param- eters of a valid search warrant or are otherwise entitled to be in a position to view the items seized.’’ (Internal quotation marks omitted.) State v. Cobb, 251 Conn. 285, 347 , 743 A.2d 1 (1999), cert. denied, 531 U.S. 841 , 121 S. Ct. 106 , 148 L. 2025The plain view doctrine is ‘‘based upon the premise that the police need not ignore incriminating evidence in plain view while they are operating within the param- eters of a valid search warrant or are otherwise entitled to be in a position to view the items seized.’’ (Internal quotation marks omitted.) State v. Cobb, 251 Conn. 285, 347 , 743 A.2d 1 (1999), cert. denied, 531 U.S. 841 , 121 S. Ct. 106 , 148 L.	4	2006–2025
Gaye v. Kramer green scotus · 2000 2 sentences 2025The plain view doctrine is ‘‘based upon the premise that the police need not ignore incriminating evidence in plain view while they are operating within the param- eters of a valid search warrant or are otherwise entitled to be in a position to view the items seized.’’ (Internal quotation marks omitted.) State v. Cobb, 251 Conn. 285, 347 , 743 A.2d 1 (1999), cert. denied, 531 U.S. 841 , 121 S. Ct. 106 , 148 L. 2006The plain view doctrine is “based upon the premise that the police need not ignore incriminating evidence in plain view while they are operating within the parameters of a valid search warrant or are otherwise entitled to be in a position to view the items seized.” (Internal quotation marks omitted.) State v. Cobb, 251 Conn. 285, 347 , 743 A.2d 1 (1999), cert. denied, 531 U.S. 841 , 121 S. Ct. 106 , 148 L.	4	2006–2025
Choice v. Goord green scotus · 2000 2 sentences 2025The plain view doctrine is ‘‘based upon the premise that the police need not ignore incriminating evidence in plain view while they are operating within the param- eters of a valid search warrant or are otherwise entitled to be in a position to view the items seized.’’ (Internal quotation marks omitted.) State v. Cobb, 251 Conn. 285, 347 , 743 A.2d 1 (1999), cert. denied, 531 U.S. 841 , 121 S. Ct. 106 , 148 L. 2006The plain view doctrine is “based upon the premise that the police need not ignore incriminating evidence in plain view while they are operating within the parameters of a valid search warrant or are otherwise entitled to be in a position to view the items seized.” (Internal quotation marks omitted.) State v. Cobb, 251 Conn. 285, 347 , 743 A.2d 1 (1999), cert. denied, 531 U.S. 841 , 121 S. Ct. 106 , 148 L.	4	2006–2025
Zimmerman v. Meloy green scotus · 2000 2 sentences 2025The plain view doctrine is ‘‘based upon the premise that the police need not ignore incriminating evidence in plain view while they are operating within the param- eters of a valid search warrant or are otherwise entitled to be in a position to view the items seized.’’ (Internal quotation marks omitted.) State v. Cobb, 251 Conn. 285, 347 , 743 A.2d 1 (1999), cert. denied, 531 U.S. 841 , 121 S. Ct. 106 , 148 L. 2006The plain view doctrine is “based upon the premise that the police need not ignore incriminating evidence in plain view while they are operating within the parameters of a valid search warrant or are otherwise entitled to be in a position to view the items seized.” (Internal quotation marks omitted.) State v. Cobb, 251 Conn. 285, 347 , 743 A.2d 1 (1999), cert. denied, 531 U.S. 841 , 121 S. Ct. 106 , 148 L.	4	2006–2025
State v. Hamilton green conn · 1990 2 sentences 2001State v. Hamilton , 214 Conn. 692 , 700 . 1999The defendant cited State v. Hamilton, 214 Conn. 692 (1990) to argue that under the Connecticut constitution there is a requirement of inadvertence for the exception to apply.	3	1994–2001
Powers v. United States green scotus · 1973 2 sentences 1989It is well established that “where a police officer has a warrant to search a given area for specified objects, and in the course of the search comes across some other article of incriminating character the property is seizable under the plain view doctrine.” United States v. Pocelli, 470 F.2d 67, 70 (2d Cir. 1972), cert. denied, 410 U.S. 983 , 93 S. Ct. 1501 , 36 L. 1986The state con tends that the seizure of these items was lawful under the plain view doctrine. “ ‘ “[Wjhere a police officer has a warrant to search a given area for specified objects, and in the course of the search comes across some other article of incriminating character, the property is seizable under the plain view doctrine.” United, States v. Pacelli, 470 F.2d 67, 70 (2d Cir. 1972), cert. denied, 410 U.S. 983 , 93 S. Ct. 1501 , 36 L.	3	1978–1989
Walker v. United States green scotus · 1973 2 sentences 1989It is well established that “where a police officer has a warrant to search a given area for specified objects, and in the course of the search comes across some other article of incriminating character the property is seizable under the plain view doctrine.” United States v. Pocelli, 470 F.2d 67, 70 (2d Cir. 1972), cert. denied, 410 U.S. 983 , 93 S. Ct. 1501 , 36 L. 1986The state con tends that the seizure of these items was lawful under the plain view doctrine. “ ‘ “[Wjhere a police officer has a warrant to search a given area for specified objects, and in the course of the search comes across some other article of incriminating character, the property is seizable under the plain view doctrine.” United, States v. Pacelli, 470 F.2d 67, 70 (2d Cir. 1972), cert. denied, 410 U.S. 983 , 93 S. Ct. 1501 , 36 L.	3	1978–1989
State v. Arokium green connappct · 2013 2 sentences 2019"The plain view doctrine is based upon the premise that the police need not ignore incriminating evidence in plain view while they are ... entitled to be in a position to view the items seized." (Internal quotation marks omitted.) State v. Arokium , 143 Conn. App. 419 , 433, 71 A.3d 569 , cert. denied, 310 Conn. 904 , 75 A.3d 31 (2013) ; see also Coolidge v. New Hampshire , 403 U.S. 443 , 464-73, 91 S.Ct. 2022 , 29 L.Ed.2d 564 (1971) ; State v. Ruth , 181 Conn. 187 , 193, 435 A.2d 3 (1980). 2019"The plain view doctrine is based upon the premise that the police need not ignore incriminating evidence in plain view while they are ... entitled to be in a position to view the items seized." (Internal quotation marks omitted.) State v. Arokium , 143 Conn. App. 419 , 433, 71 A.3d 569 , cert. denied, 310 Conn. 904 , 75 A.3d 31 (2013) ; see also Coolidge v. New Hampshire , 403 U.S. 443 , 464-73, 91 S.Ct. 2022 , 29 L.Ed.2d 564 (1971) ; State v. Ruth , 181 Conn. 187 , 193, 435 A.2d 3 (1980).	2	2019–2025
State v. Onofrio green conn · 1979 2 sentences 2007Our Supreme Court has held that the plain view doctrine “makes permissible, with certain limitations, the seizure of items found by the police while executing a warrant naming other objects.” State v. Onofrio, 179 Conn. 23, 39 , 425 A.2d 560 (1979). 2007Our Supreme Court has held that the plain view doctrine “makes permissible, with certain limitations, the seizure of items found by the police while executing a warrant naming other objects.” State v. Onofrio, 179 Conn. 23, 39 , 425 A.2d 560 (1979).	2	2000–2007
State v. Montgomery green conn · 2000 2 sentences 2002The police meet the immediately apparent requirement if, [up]on discovery, they have probable cause to associate the property in plain view with criminal activity without further investigation." (Citation omitted; internal quotation marks omitted.) State v. Montgomery, 254 Conn. 694 , 706 , 759 A.2d 995 (2000). 2002The police meet the immediately apparent requirement if, [up]on discovery, they have probable cause to associate the property in plain view with criminal activity without further investigation." (Citation omitted; internal quotation marks omitted.) State v. Montgomery, 254 Conn. 694 , 706 , 759 A.2d 995 (2000).	2	2001–2002
State v. Sailor green connappct · 1994 2 sentences 2002Ed. 2d 334 (1993). “[T]he police need not ignore incriminating evidence in plain view while they are operating within the parameters of a valid search warrant or are otherwise entitled to be in a position to view the items seized.” (Internal quotation marks omitted.) State v. Sailor, 33 Conn. App. 409, 414 , 635 A.2d 1237 , cert. denied, 229 Conn. 911 , 642 A.2d 1208 (1994). 2002Ed. 2d 334 (1993). “[T]he police need not ignore incriminating evidence in plain view while they are operating within the parameters of a valid search warrant or are otherwise entitled to be in a position to view the items seized.” (Internal quotation marks omitted.) State v. Sailor, 33 Conn. App. 409, 414 , 635 A.2d 1237 , cert. denied, 229 Conn. 911 , 642 A.2d 1208 (1994).	2	1997–2002
United States v. William Bruce Hare green ca6 · 1979 2 sentences 2001The Connecticut Supreme Court has eschewed the Second Circuit Court of Appeals' interpretation of the inadvertence aspect of the plain view doctrine; id 705-06 and finds persuasive the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals interpretation in United States v. Hare , 589 F.2d 1291 , 1294 (6th Cir. 1979). 1990In United States v. Hare, supra, 1294 , the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals provides an analysis of the inadvertence limitation of the plain view doctrine that we find persuasive.	2	1990–2001
Rodriguez v. United States green scotus · 1990 2 sentences 1999The warrantless seizure of contraband that is in plain view is reasonable under the fourth amendment if two requirements are met: “(1) the initial intrusion that enabled the police to view the items seized must have been lawful; and (2) the police must have had probable cause to believe that these items were contraband or stolen goods.” 7 State v. Ruscoe, 212 Conn. 223 , 237-38 n.8, 563 A.2d 267 (1989), cert. denied, 493 U.S. 1084 , 110 S. Ct. 1144 , 107 L. 1998The warrantless seizure of contraband that is in plain view is reasonable under the fourth amendment if two requirements are met:' “(1) the initial intrusion that enabled the police to view the items seized must have been lawful; and (2) the police must have probable cause to believe that these items were contraband or stolen goods.” 3 State v. Ruscoe, 212 Conn. 223 , 237-38 n.8, 563 A.2d 267 (1989), cert. denied, 493 U.S. 1084 , 110 S. Ct. 1144 , 107 L.	2	1998–1999
Ruscoe v. Connecticut green scotus · 1990 2 sentences 1999The warrantless seizure of contraband that is in plain view is reasonable under the fourth amendment if two requirements are met: “(1) the initial intrusion that enabled the police to view the items seized must have been lawful; and (2) the police must have had probable cause to believe that these items were contraband or stolen goods.” 7 State v. Ruscoe, 212 Conn. 223 , 237-38 n.8, 563 A.2d 267 (1989), cert. denied, 493 U.S. 1084 , 110 S. Ct. 1144 , 107 L. 1998The warrantless seizure of contraband that is in plain view is reasonable under the fourth amendment if two requirements are met:' “(1) the initial intrusion that enabled the police to view the items seized must have been lawful; and (2) the police must have probable cause to believe that these items were contraband or stolen goods.” 3 State v. Ruscoe, 212 Conn. 223 , 237-38 n.8, 563 A.2d 267 (1989), cert. denied, 493 U.S. 1084 , 110 S. Ct. 1144 , 107 L.	2	1998–1999
Big Eagle v. United States green scotus · 1990 2 sentences 1999The warrantless seizure of contraband that is in plain view is reasonable under the fourth amendment if two requirements are met: “(1) the initial intrusion that enabled the police to view the items seized must have been lawful; and (2) the police must have had probable cause to believe that these items were contraband or stolen goods.” 7 State v. Ruscoe, 212 Conn. 223 , 237-38 n.8, 563 A.2d 267 (1989), cert. denied, 493 U.S. 1084 , 110 S. Ct. 1144 , 107 L. 1998The warrantless seizure of contraband that is in plain view is reasonable under the fourth amendment if two requirements are met:' “(1) the initial intrusion that enabled the police to view the items seized must have been lawful; and (2) the police must have probable cause to believe that these items were contraband or stolen goods.” 3 State v. Ruscoe, 212 Conn. 223 , 237-38 n.8, 563 A.2d 267 (1989), cert. denied, 493 U.S. 1084 , 110 S. Ct. 1144 , 107 L.	2	1998–1999
Terry v. Ohio green scotus · 1968	2	1994–1995
State v. Couture green conn · 1984	2	1990–1993
Baumann v. Typographic Innovations, Inc. green scotus · 1985	2	1990–1993
State v. Graham green conn · 1982	2	1986–1992
State v. Watson green conn · 1973	2	1990–1992
State v. DiStefano neutral connappct · 1986	2	1989–1989
State v. Pepe green conn · 1978	2	1986–1989
Southwestern Sheet Metal Works, Inc. v. Semco Manufacturing, Inc. green scotus · 1987	2	1989–1989
Smith v. Commissioner of Correction green conn · 2007	1	2011–2011
State v. Monroe green conn · 2007	1	2011–2011
State v. Thomas green connappct · 2006	1	2011–2011
State v. Gaston green conn · 2007	1	2009–2009
State v. BROWNE III green conn · 2007	1	2009–2009
State v. Chambers green washctapp · 1997	1	2007–2007
State v. Clark green conn · 2001	1	2006–2006
State v. Outlaw green connappct · 2002	1	2006–2006
Hartford Federal Savings & Loan Ass'n v. Tucker green conn · 1989	1	2005–2005
State v. Torrice green conn · 1989	1	2005–2005
State v. Blackwell green connappct · 1989	1	2005–2005

Statutes the citing opinions construe

CT § Conn. Gen. Stat. § 21a-277 (15) CT § Conn. Gen. Stat. § 21a-279 (12) CT § Conn. Gen. Stat. § 54-94a (11) CT § Conn. Gen. Stat. § 21a-278 (10) CT § Conn. Gen. Stat. § 21a-278a (7) CT § Conn. Gen. Stat. § 51-199 (6) CT § Conn. Gen. Stat. § 53a-3 (5) CT § Conn. Gen. Stat. § 29-38 (4) CT § Conn. Gen. Stat. § 53a-119 (4) CT § Conn. Gen. Stat. § 53a-217 (4) CT § Conn. Gen. Stat. § 53a-48 (3) CT § Conn. Gen. Stat. § 53a-54a (3)

Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.

Where else courts name it

OH 323 (1973–2026) PA 276 (1970–2026) TX 266 (1972–2026) LA 207 (1975–2025) NJ 156 (1977–2026) IL 148 (1968–2025) NY 138 (1972–2026) WA 118 (1971–2026) GA 98 (1974–2024) MI 98 (1970–2026) IN 96 (1971–2023) VA 82 (1987–2026) FL 80 (1973–2026) MA 76 (1975–2026) CA 74 (1972–2026) MO 73 (1972–2017) TN 69 (1980–2025) NC 63 (1974–2025) CT 59 (1973–2025) AL 59 (1971–2018) CO 59 (1970–2026) KS 54 (1971–2022) MD 51 (1972–2026) OR 45 (1972–2026) MN 44 (1977–2024) ID 43 (1974–2026) NM 43 (1975–2025) WI 41 (1973–2025) MS 37 (1977–2025) DC 32 (1973–2025) MT 31 (1977–2025) IA 31 (1976–2026) SC 29 (1983–2023) KY 28 (1972–2025) AR 27 (1977–2021) OK 26 (1977–2015) ND 23 (1981–2026) AZ 22 (1973–2022) NE 21 (1976–2022) UT 19 (1981–2006) NH 19 (1976–2019) WY 18 (1979–2019) HI 17 (1975–2021) DE 17 (1971–2025) WV 17 (1980–2023) RI 16 (1974–2010) ME 16 (1971–2025) AK 16 (1974–2019) NV 15 (1981–2021) VT 12 (1976–2021) SD 11 (1973–2006) VI 8 (1984–2026)

Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check