State v. Yen Yang

¶ 1. The State appeals an order granting a motion to suppress statements and evidence. The State contends that the trial court erred by applying the fruit of the poisonous tree doctrine to Miranda 2 violations that did not also infringe upon Yen Yang's constitutional rights. The issues presented are whether physical evidence derived from statements obtained in violation of Miranda and a subsequent Mirandized statement are admissible.

¶ 2. Addressing these issues in reverse order, we conclude that Elstad's 3 two-part test, adopted by our supreme court in State v. Armstrong, 223 Wis. 2d 331,…