prosecutors obtained a wiretapping warrant authorizing eavesdropping in the home of Benny Soprano, an alleged New Jersey organized crime figure. The warrant was issued based upon adequate probable cause and contained a proper minimization plan. What it did not contain was an authorization for police to enter the Soprano residence and plant the eavesdropping device. Police set up a surveillance of the Soprano house and each member of the Soprano family, including the children, as well as the housekeeper, in order to ascertain when the house would be empty so that police could enter and plant the device. After maintaining the surveillance for a week, the police were able to ascertain that the house was empty, entered the house, and planted the device. Will the incriminating evidence recorded by the device be admissible in Soprano's upcoming RICO trial? Question 13Select one: a. No. The evidence is inadmissible because the police conduct of maintaining close surveillance on the family for a period of a week violated the fourth Amendment. b. No. The evidence is inadmissible because the police entered the home without court authorization in order to plant the listening device. c. Yes. The evidence is admissible, provided that the prosecuting attorney and the judge at the time the warrant was issued discussed the manner in which police would gain entry to the house. d. Yes. The evidence is admissible because it was seized pursuant to a duly issued search warrant based upon prob