Opinion ID: 2227980
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 9

Heading: seizure of cocaine

Text: Andre's final argument is that the police could not seize the cocaine based on what has been referred to as the plain-feel doctrine as established by Minnesota v. Dickerson, 508 U.S. 366, 113 S.Ct. 2130, 124 L.Ed.2d 334 (1993), and adopted by this court in State v. Craven, 253 Neb. 601, 571 N.W.2d 612 (1997). Noting that Miller testified that he `immediately' perceived the lump in Andre's sock to be crack cocaine and citing to our opinion in Craven, supra, the Court of Appeals determined that the seizure was appropriate pursuant to the plain-feel doctrine. In re Interest of Andre W., 7 Neb.App. 539, 548, 584 N.W.2d 474, 480 (1998). We agree and adopt the reasoning of the Court of Appeals on this issue. Finding no error, we affirm the judgment of the Court of Appeals. AFFIRMED.