An indigent defendant was arrested and charged with burglary. At his preliminary hearing, counsel was appointed. Unable to satisfy the conditions for his pre-trial release, the defendant was detained in jail awaiting trial on the burglary charge. While the defendant was in jail, a police detective questioned him about an unrelated murder without his lawyer present. Prior to questioning, the police detective revealed that she was a police officer and Mirandized the defendant. The defendant subsequently made an incriminating statement with regard to the murder, which lead to him being charged for that crime as well. At his trial for the murder, the defendant timely moved to suppress the statement he made to the police detective as having been obtained in violation of his constitutional rights. Should the court grant this request

The police of a resort town discovered that a well-known cat burglar was currently living in town under an assumed name. to try to catch her in the act of burglary, an undercover officer approached the burglar with a plan for a burglary. the undercover officer told the burglar that he knew who she was and that he had a plan to steal jewels from someone staying in one of the town's resorts. the burglar initially refused the offer; however, after lengthy cajoling, she finally agreed to the plan. as the time for the burglary drew near, the burglar had second thoughts. three hours before the theft was scheduled to take place, the burglar called the police and told them of the plan. she told them that she was not going to show up, but that her cohort (the undercover officer) would be there, and told them how to recognize the undercover officer. is the burglar guilty of conspiracy at common law?