The following represents a brief summary of the facts in the 1963 case Wong Sun v. United States. In this case, federal narcotics agents illegally arrested Toy, who then implicated Yee as drug dealer. Yee was arrested, and drugs were found in Yee’s home. Yee then stated that he got the drugs from Wong Sun. Wong Sun is then arrested. Toy, Yee, and Wong Sun were all charged with narcotics violations. Wong Sun was released on his own recognizance. A few days later, Wong Sun voluntarily returned to the police station, was interrogated, and provided statements to federal narcotics officers. The Court was asked to rule on whether the narcotics seized from Yee’s home and Wong Sun’s confession were fruits of the poisonous tree which, according to the defendants, was Toy’s illegal arrest.

Question

Explaining and applying the exclusionary rule and any applicable exceptions, discuss how the Court should rule about Yee’s claim and about Wong Sun’s claim?

What will be an ideal response?

Answer 1

Student responses should include for Yee, an analysis of the relationship between Toy’s statement and the seizure of the narcotics from Yee and a discussion of the fruit of the poisonous tree doctrine that would result in the exclusion of the evidence. For Wong Sun, an analysis of the relationship between the illegal arrest and his subsequent arrest should include the fruit of the poisonous tree doctrine but should continue on to address the impact of Wong Sun’s voluntary submission to interrogation days later as purging the taint.