State v. Alexander

Defendant was convicted of the crime of posses*44sion of marihuana. On appeal he claims that the evidence seized from his apartment and admitted into evidence against him should have been suppressed.

The relevant seizure occurred on December 12, 1969, when police officers went to defendant’s apartment to execute a warrant for his arrest on a separate charge of selling dangerous drugs. The police did not have a warrant to search the apartment.

The defendant argues that under a proper definition of the term, the evidence seized was not in plain view, and even if in plain view, was nevertheless…