The Supreme Court explained that the Minnesota Supreme Court rejected a "plain feel doctrine" because, among other reasons, "the sense of touch is inherently less immediate and less reliable than the sense of sight." The Supreme Court disagreed, explaining: The Supreme Court explained that the Minnesota Supreme Court rejected a "plain feel doctrine" because, among other reasons, "the sense of touch is inherently less immediate and less reliable than the sense of sight." The Supreme Court disagreed, explaining: Although the sense of touch is not as good as the sense of sight, it can be used in conjunction with the sense of sight to make the search reliable. The Supreme Court did not actually disagree with the Minnesota Supreme Court on this point. The sense of touch, although inherently unreliable, is still good enough by itself to justify the seizure of contraband. In Terry v. Ohio the Supreme Court said that the sense of touch is capable of revealing the nature of an object with sufficient reliability to support a seizure