1. The defendant, arrested a block away from a jewelry store that had just been robbed, met the description given by the proprietor. Immediately following the arrest, the arresting officers searched the defendant and found a gun sticking out of his pants. They asked him what he had done with the stolen jewelry. The defendant told the police that he discarded the jewelry in the trash container at the corner when he saw the patrol car with flashing lights approaching. One of the officers retrieved the jewelry from the container. Prior to trial, the defendant moved to suppress his response to the officer's question and the jewelry. How should the court rule?

(A) Both the defendant's statement and the jewelry should be suppressed because the officer failed to give the defendant Miranda warnings and the jewelry is derivative of the Miranda violation.

(B) Both the statement and the jewelry are admissible because Miranda warnings need not be given during a public safety emergency.

(C) The defendant's statement is inadmissible because of the Miranda violation, but the jewelry is admissible.

(D) The statement and the jewelry are inadmissible because the defendant's statement was involuntary and taints the derivative evidence