In Marron v. United States (1927), the U.S. Supreme Court upheld a lower court's decision that evidence seized during a search, which was not specifically described in the warrant but found in plain sight of officers conducting a lawful search, could be used against defendants at trial. The case involved federal prohibition agents who had obtained a warrant to search for and seize liquor illegally kept for sale at certain premises occupied by James Marron and others. While executing this warrant, they discovered an incriminating ledger and bills on site which were then used as evidence leading to their conviction of maintaining nuisance under Prohibition laws. The defense argued these items were unlawfully taken since they weren't mentioned in the original warrant; however, the Supreme Court ruled that once law enforcement is legally on premises via validly issued warrants, any additional evidence discovered can also be seized even if it wasn't specified initially.

In the dissenting opinion for Marron v. United States, Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr. argued that the warrant used to search and seize items from a speakeasy was too broad and violated the Fourth Amendment's protection against unreasonable searches and seizures. He contended that while officers had a right to arrest those involved in illegal activities at the establishment, they did not have an unrestricted right to search all areas of it without specific cause or direction from their warrant. The majority ruling allowed for seizure of ledgers found during this wide-ranging search as evidence; however, Holmes believed these should be excluded due to being obtained through what he viewed as an unconstitutional application of police power.