Brief for the United States, Wong Sun v. United States/Argument
Argument
Petitioners argue that the trial court erred in admitting several items of evidence—petitioner Toy's statements to the federal agent (at the time of and after his arrest) which led the agents to Johnny Yee and to petitioner Wong Sun, the narcotics found at Yee's house, and the formal confessions made by petitioners some days later, subsequent to their arraignment—because all of this evidence resulted from the petitioners' arrests which are claimed to have been unlawful. Although holding that the arrests of both petitioners were invalid as not based on probable cause, the court of appeals sustained the convictions on the ground that the invalidity of the arrests did not void the confessions by petitioners nor the statement by petitioner Toy which led the agents to recover narcotics from Yee. In effect, the court held that there was nothing in the fact of petitioner Toy's arrest which required him to send the agents to Yee and hence that the finding of narcotics at Yee's house could not be deemed the fruits of the illegal arrest. Similarly, this new information, which led to proof against petitioner Wong Sun and circled back to Toy as well, was held not to be the fruit of the arrest of Toy.
The government agrees with the court of appeals that the evidence introduced at the trial was detached from and not the product of the arrests. However, as pointed out in the government's brief in opposition, it is our initial position that that issue need not be reached because we believe that the judgments below may be sustained upon the ground that the arrests were lawful emergency arrests based upon probable cause. We discuss first our reasons for believing that the arrests were lawful, before turning to the grounds relied upon by the court of appeals.