What happens if various interpretations of the “plain view” doctrine create significant differences between jurisdictions?

Imagine that the Supreme Court has issued a decision that reverses Arizona v. Hicks (1987), and the Supreme Court under a new case (fictional case), entitled New York v. Henderson (2016), now holds that the plain view doctrine does allow police officers to seize on less than probable cause, any item they happen to see that is in “plain view.”

750-1,000 words that addresses the following:

• Explain the “plain-view” doctrine and the probable cause requirement with respect to this doctrine.
• Explain how the adoption of the Henderson case would affect public policy.
• If a policing agency disagrees with the Henderson case, are they required to follow the case or may they be allowed to provide more procedural safe guards as inferred in Arizona v. Hicks? Provide examples.
• What happens if various interpretations of the “plain view” doctrine create significant differences between jurisdictions?

Be sure to cite three to five relevant scholarly sources in support of your content. Use only sources found at the GCU Library, government websites/legal case sites or those provided in Class Resources.

Prepare this assignment according to the guidelines found in the APA Style Guide, located in the Student Success Center. An abstract is not required.

This assignment uses a rubric. Please review the rubric prior to beginning the assignment to become familiar with the expectations for successful completion.

You are required to submit this assignment to LopesWrite. A link to the LopesWrite technical support articles is located in Class Resources if you need assistance.