Whether Texas' Third Court of Appeals erred in finding that the items found in the trunk of petitioner's car did not constitute fruit of the poisonous tree

QUESTIONS PRESENTED 1. Whether Texas’ Third Court of Appeals Erred by Finding that the Items Found in the Trunk of Petitioner’s Car Did Not Constitute Fruit of the Poisonous Tree, the Discovery of Which Flowed Directly from Petitioner’s Unwarned Statement to Police. 2. Whether Texas’ Third Court of Appeals Erred by Finding That Petitioner’s “Actions and Statements” Provided Probable Cause to Search Petitioner’s Car, Including His Trunk, Because the Requirements of the Automobile Exception Were Satisfied. li RELATED CASES Petitioner was charged by indictment with the possession of a controlled substance with the intent to deliver. See State v. Pena; No. CR2017-110 in the 207th District Court of Comal County, Texas. Petitioner’s motion to suppress was granted on October 24, 2018. Texas’ Third Court of Appeals reversed the judgment of the trial court on August 13, 2019, in case number 03-18-00765-CR. On February 26, 2020, the Court of Criminal Appeals refused the Petition for Discretionary Review (case number PD-0947-19).