Why was the handgun considered legal evidence but the computer was not during an arrest without a search warrant?

The handgun was considered legal evidence while the computer was not due to the application of the containers test in relation to searches and seizures. In legal terms, when an officer seizes items in plain view, they must have the right to be in the location where the evidence is found, and the evidence itself must be immediately apparent as something that is subject to seizure.

The containers test determines how items are treated in terms of their ability to hold other items. In this case, a handgun, which is considered a weapon, can be easily and immediately identified as illegal if a reasonable suspicion of a crime exists. It does not require a warrant for the assessment of its legality when officers are in a legitimate position to observe it.

On the other hand, computers are treated differently due to the significant amount of data they can hold and their complex nature. A computer can contain a vast array of private information, and items found within it may not be immediately apparent as illegal or relevant to a crime. As a result, the courts often require a warrant to search and seize items from computers because they are seen as containers of information rather than contraband themselves. This distinction emphasizes the legal protections against unreasonable searches and ensures that sensitive data remains safeguarded unless there is probable cause accompanied