Law for Business 12th Edition by James Barnes,Terry Dworkin,Eric Richards

Exercise 4

While working as a lifeguard, Mann secretly installed a video camera in the women's locker room. The police discovered it was Mann who installed it because he had accidentally filmed himself during the installation. They got a warrant to search Mann's computer and hard drives for evidence of voyeurism. During the search, the officer discovered evidence of child pornography. Mann challenged the use of this evidence because it exceeded the scope of the warrant. The state argued that it fell within the "plain-view" doctrine. Is the state correct? Why?