Opinion ID: 2219142
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Wisconsin Law and the Yang Decision

Text: ś 52. Relying on Tucker and Elstad, the Wisconsin court of appeals in Yang, 233 Wis. 2d 545, ś 3, held that the officer's failure to administer the Miranda warnings prior to Yang's oral statements was not a constitutional infringement. The court of appeals said: The Tucker and Elstad holdings could not be clearer: the poisonous tree in Wong Sun is a constitutional violation and, absent such a violation, there is no tainted fruit. It is well established that the failure to deliver Miranda warnings is not itself a constitutional violation. (Citing Elstad ). Accordingly, derivative physical evidence obtained as a result of an unwarned statement that was voluntary under the Fifth Amendment is not tainted fruit. Yang, 233 Wis. 2d 545, ś 36. ś 53. Moreover, the court of appeals in Yang said: Policemen investigating serious crimes [cannot realistically be expected to] make no errors whatsoever. If errors are made by law enforcement officers in administering the prophylactic Miranda procedures, they should not breed the same irremediable consequences as police infringement of the Fifth Amendment itself. Yang, 233 Wis. 2d 545, ś 37 (citing Elstad, 470 U.S. at 308-309).