In State v. Yang, 2000 WI App 63, 233 Wis. 2d 545, 608 N.W.2d 703, the Court considered whether physical evidence derived from a statement obtained in violation of Miranda must be suppressed. Consistent with the reasoning expressed in the prevailing authorities, the Court concluded that "the 'fruit of the poisonous tree' doctrine does not apply to physical evidence discovered as the result of a statement obtained in violation of Miranda's prophylactic rules, as opposed to a constitutional infringement." Id.