Which of the following is an exception to the warrant requirement recognized in searches?

• A. Plain View
• B. Probable cause
• C. Ex post facto
• D. Hearsay

Answer: (A)

The key idea here is that certain circumstances allow police to act without a warrant, even though most searches require one. The plain view doctrine is one of those exceptions: if officers are lawfully present in a location and they observe an item in plain view, they may seize it without a warrant. For this to apply, the officer’s initial intrusion or presence must be lawful, and the incriminating nature of the item must be immediately apparent from that observation—no rummaging or moving things to uncover evidence. If the officer had to manipulate the area or search beyond what was legally allowed to see the item, plain view wouldn’t justify seizure.

Other options don’t fit as warrant-exemption rules. Probable cause is a standard used to justify warrants or certain arrests, not a standalone exception that permits warrantless searches. Ex post facto concerns retroactive criminal penalties, not search procedures. Hearsay relates to what kinds of statements may be admitted as evidence, not to the legality of searches.