The case involved a woman who was arrested after police officers discovered a kilogram of cocaine in her hotel room. She was charged in a two-count indictment with cocaine possession with the intent to distribute. She was also charged with crossing State lines for unlawful purposes. The original two-count indictment was superseded by a three-count indictment which added a charge of conspiracy to distribute cocaine, and she was convicted on all three counts. On appeal, she requested a new trial because she learned that one of the prosecution's material witnesses had committed perjury at her trial. A second jury trial was held, and she was again convicted on all three counts. She initiated a second appeal, claiming that her rights had been violated during the search warrant process and that she was not read Miranda warnings prior to her formal arrest. The court initially found that her detention pursuant to the search warrant constituted reasonable seizure under the fourth amendment. Addressing the fifth amendment issue, the court noted that Miranda warnings are to be given only to suspects who are subjected to custodial interrogation. The court found that the search warrant process conducted by the police was proper and that the individual was not detained pursuant to an arrest warant. The court also upheld the constitutionality of the prearrest seizure.