Officers had a search warrant for a gun, and, as soon as they entered, they found a gun in plain view. They did not have to believe that gun was one sought, and they could keep looking in hiding places. In the course of searching for more guns, they validly found drugs. United States v. Lasyone, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 2576 (M.D. La. January 10, 2012)*:<\/p>\n
Moreover, in addition to the Court’s finding that the narcotics were lawfully seized pursuant to the plain view doctrine, the Court also finds that the narcotics were lawfully seized in the course of the officers’ execution of the search warrant. As mentioned supra, the Court heard testimony from Officer Morris, the commander of the operation, who testified that he has over twenty years of experience in his field, and, as part of his training and experience, knows that firearms and other contraband are oftentimes intentionally hidden from the naked eye. He further testified that, although there were several firearms that were in plain view on the counter top (including the one later determined to have been the firearm described in the search warrant), the search warrant did not include a serial number for the firearm at issue, and, therefore, the officers conducting the search did not know with absolute certainty that the firearm they retrieved was the same one described in the search warrant. … [\u00b6] The Court agrees and finds that the officer’s act of opening of the garbage bag and the lunch box during their search for the firearm described in the warrant was within the scope of the warrant, and, thus, constitutional.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
b2evALnk.b2WPAutP Continue reading