With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". those guilty verdicts against Muller (on Counts IV and V) were their independent verdicts. Wrensford moved for a mistrial as to Counts III and IV and Muller moved for a mistrial as to all counts. In response, the District Court excused the jury to discuss with the parties whether it should deliver a jury instruction directing the jury to rede-liberate on Counts III and IV for Wrens-ford and Count I for Muller. D ir. 1994) (ruling that an illegal ■ arrest occurred when officers stopped a cab in which the defendant was riding on an interstate •highway, read him his Miranda rights, and brought him to an airport police station in a police cruiser, and noting that “(w]hile [the defendant] was not taken from his home to the police station, he was taken ‘forcibly' from -36 (9th Cir. 1984) (<HOLDING>). Not every transportation by police, however,

A: holding that escorting the defendant from a baggage claim area to a dea office approximately 75 yards away was an arrest and that his consent to the search of his bag in that office was tainted by the illegal seizure
B: recognizing that a prosecutors office is an entity and that information in the possession of one attorney in the office must be attributed to the office as a whole
C: holding that the court of appeals erred in declining to consider whether the arrest was illegal and whether the consent was tainted by the potentially illegal police activity
D: holding that the defendants unlawful arrest in his hotel room rendered his subsequent consent to the search of his room invalid even though he signed a consent form allowing the search after his arrest because the government  completely failed to address whether there was a break in the causal relationship between the unlawful arrest and the subsequent search
A.