Leon Mohammed$$ s home had been illegally searched by state law enforcement officials who found the presence of heroin. Analysis of the package revealed fingerprints that belonged to an associate and some DNA material that implicated the same associate, Ali Schwartz. When police interviewed Ali Schwartz, he gave them evidence that further implicated Leon Mohammed in additional drug trafficking. Police referred charges of drug possession against Leon Mohammed, and the prosecutor$$ s office decided to prosecute since it could get Ali Schwartz to testify about the drug dealing of Leon Mohammed. Consistent with the exclusionary rule and the fruit of the poisonous tree doctrine, Leon Mohammed:

should be able to use the original illegality to suppress the original heroin discovered, and Leon Mohammed should be able to suppress the evidence of additional drug trafficking taken from Ali Schwartz since it was derivative of the original illegality.

will not be able to use the exclusionary rule to suppress evidence since the rule only applies in federal courts.

should be able to use the original illegality to suppress the heroin discovered at Leon Mohammed$$ s home but cannot hope to suppress evidence found in someone else$$ s home.

should be able to use the original illegality to suppress the heroin discovered at his home but cannot suppress the other evidence given by Ali Schwartz since there has been significant attenuation from the original illegality to make the evidence admissible.

should be able to suppress the evidence taken from his home and argue that the evidence offered by Ali Schwartz against Leon Mohammed should be excluded since Ali Schwartz$$ s rights' have been violated..