What follows is an opinion from a United States Court of Appeals.
Your task is to identify the issue in the case, that is, the social and/or political context of the litigation in which more purely legal issues are argued. Put somewhat differently, this field identifies the nature of the conflict between the litigants. The focus here is on the subject matter of the controversy rather than its legal basis.
Your task is to determine the specific issue in the case within the broad category of "criminal - federal offense".

Opinion:
Warren F. WILLIAMS, Appellant, v. UNITED STATES of America, Appellee.
No. 13369.
United States Court of Appeals District of Columbia Circuit.
Argued Sept. 14,1956.
Decided Oct. 11, 1956.
Petition for Rehearing In Banc Denied Nov. 27, 1956.
Mr. Yale Kamisar, Washington, D. C. (appointed by this Court), for appellant.
Mr. Nathan J. Paulson, Asst. U. S. Atty., with whom Messrs. Oliver Gasch, U. S. Atty., Lewis Carroll and Arthur J. McLaughlin, Asst. U. S. Attys., were on the brief, for appellee. -
Before EDGERTON, Chief Judge, and BAZELON and FAHY, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM.
The arrest of appellant was illegal because without a warrant, without probable cause, and without other validating circumstances. The government does not seriously contend otherwise. A cigarette package containing capsules which in turn contained contraband narcotics was procured by the officers, who had appellant in custody, when he dropped the package in a corridor of the precinct station shortly after his arrest and when it seemed clear he was to be searched. The contraband capsules were admitted in evidence. Since they were procured as a result of the illegal arrest the motion for their suppression made at the trial should have been granted. In a pre-trial motion to suppress appellant had disclaimed ownership of the capsules. But when his objection to their admission was renewed and acted upon at the trial itself the unchallenged testimony of the prosecution showed that the capsules were in appellant’s possession until he dropped them, thus giving him standing to object.
Reversed and remanded for a new trial.
. Appellant was convicted on each of two counts of an indictment for violating provisions of the laws governing narcotics, viz., 26 U.S.C.A. § 2553(a) and 21 U.S. C.A. § 174.

Question: What is the specific issue in the case within the general category of "criminal - federal offense"?

Choices:
murder
rape
arson
aggravated assault
robbery
burglary
auto theft
larceny (over $50)
other violent crimes
narcotics
alcohol related crimes, prohibition
tax fraud
firearm violations
morals charges (e.g., gambling, prostitution, obscenity)
criminal violations of government regulations of business
other white collar crime (involving no force or threat of force; e.g., embezzlement, computer fraud,bribery)
other crimes
federal offense, but specific crime not ascertained

Answer: 9