the cocaine Det. Mitchell seized from the living room, even if it was in plain view, must be suppressed. See Segura v. United States, 468 U.S. 796, 812, 104 S.Ct. 3380, 82 L.Ed.2d 599 (1984). C. Attenuation of the Taint Where, as here, a search following an illegal entry is premised upon the consent of the defendant, the question becomes whether the tangible and testimonial evidence subsequently obtained is justified on the basis of that consent or is indelibly tainted by the initial illegal entry. An inquiring court must determine whether consent “has been come at by exploitation of that illegality or instead by means sufficiently distinguishable to be purged of the primary taint.” Wong Sun v. United States, 371 U.S. 471, 488, 83 S.Ct. 407, 9 L.Ed.2d 441 (1963) (citation omitted) (<HOLDING>); United States v. Robeles-Ortega, 348 F.3d
holding evidence obtained following unlawful police conduct nevertheless admissible because evidence not obtained by virtue of that unlawful conduct recognizing that evidence obtained from a search that is conducted pursuant to a warrant based partially on tainted information gathered during a prior illegal search is also tainted and must be suppressed internal quotation marks and citation omitted holding that a confession obtained by exploitation of an illegal arrest is not admissible holding that statements obtained following an illegal arrest are no less tainted than is physical evidence obtained after the same holding that the admission of evidence obtained as a result of an illegal search and seizure is subject to a harmlesserror analysis