In Illinois V

In Illinois v.Perkins,a prison inmate told the police he had learned about a homicide from a fellow inmate.The police recognized the description of the homicide as possibly being one under investigation.Consequently,the police placed an undercover agent in the cellblock with the informant and the defendant.The defendant was being held at that time for another crime unrelated to the homicide.The undercover officer engaged the defendant in a conversation about the killing and asked the defendant if he had ever "done" anybody.The officer did not give the defendant Miranda warnings before the conversation.The Supreme Court of the United States held

A) that the statements were admissible and did not violate the requirements of Miranda.
B) that the statements were inadmissible and did violate the requirements of Miranda.
C) that the statements were inadmissible and did violate the Fifth Amendment.
D) that the statements were admissible and did not violate the Fourth Amendment.