United States v. Phillip E. Naugle

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• finding that probable cause for a plain view seizure does not “demand any showing that [a reasonable] belief be correct or more likely true than false”
• describing the Horton lawful access requirement as being “implicated in situations such as when an officer on the street sees an object through the window of a house, or when officers make observations via aerial photography or long-range surveillance”
• when officers make observations via long-range surveillance, they “cannot use the plain view doctrine to justify a warrantless seizure, because to do so would require a warrantless entiy upon private premises.”
• severability doctrine is only applicable if the valid portions of the warrant are sufficiently particularized, distinguishable from the invalid portions, and make up the greater part of the warrant

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).