Coolidge v. New Hampshire

The Coolidge v. New Hampshire case clearly demonstrated the gray area that exists in the use of warrants and the acts of search and seizure, as shown by the multiple opinions expressed by many of the justices. The proper issuance and use of search warrants with respect to the Fourth Amendment remains a topic of great concern to law officials. As late as 1987, in Arizona v. Hicks, the definition of plain view and the questioning of warrant validity were once again brought before the U.S. Supreme Court. It seems that the contradictions argued in Coolidge still allow for varying interpretations of what, in many respects, can be viewed as the same scenario of "warrantless" search and seizure.