Triple

Given a phrase, classify it is english named entity (e.g., persons, organizations, works of art) in Latin script, or not (e.g., literals, dates, URLs, verbose phrases). For disambiguation, the statement where the phrase occurs as object is also given. Please return a JSON object with `phrase` (string, the phrase being analyzed) and `is_ne` (boolean, indicating whether the phrase is a Named Entity).

Phrase: Arizona v. Fulminante | Statement: [United States Supreme Court cases of the Rehnquist Court, significantCase, Arizona v. Fulminante]

Target entity: Arizona v. Fulminante
Context triple: [United States Supreme Court cases of the Rehnquist Court, significantCase, Arizona v. Fulminante]

• A. Arizona v. Evans
  Arizona v. Evans is a 1995 U.S. Supreme Court case that extended the good-faith exception to the exclusionary rule to evidence obtained through an arrest based on erroneous computer records.
• B. Gonzales v. Arizona
  Gonzales v. Arizona is a U.S. Supreme Court case that addressed the constitutionality of Arizona’s voter identification and proof-of-citizenship requirements for voter registration and voting.
• C. Arizona v. Johnson
  Arizona v. Johnson is a 2009 U.S. Supreme Court case that clarified police authority to frisk passengers during lawful traffic stops when officers reasonably suspect they are armed and dangerous.
• D. Arizona v. United States
  Arizona v. United States is a 2012 U.S. Supreme Court case that limited state authority over immigration enforcement by affirming broad federal power in this area.
• E. Illinois v. Caballes
  Illinois v. Caballes is a 2005 U.S. Supreme Court case holding that a dog sniff conducted during a lawful traffic stop does not violate the Fourth Amendment when it does not prolong the stop or reveal information other than the presence of contraband.
• F. None of above. chosen
• G. Unsure - the case is ambiguous/there is not enough information to decide.

Target entity: Arizona v. Fulminante
Target entity description: Arizona v. Fulminante is a landmark 1991 U.S. Supreme Court decision that held a coerced confession can be treated as trial error subject to harmless-error analysis rather than as automatically requiring reversal of a conviction.

• A. Arizona v. Evans
  Arizona v. Evans is a 1995 U.S. Supreme Court case that extended the good-faith exception to the exclusionary rule to evidence obtained through an arrest based on erroneous computer records.
• B. Gonzales v. Arizona
  Gonzales v. Arizona is a U.S. Supreme Court case that addressed the constitutionality of Arizona’s voter identification and proof-of-citizenship requirements for voter registration and voting.
• C. Arizona v. Johnson
  Arizona v. Johnson is a 2009 U.S. Supreme Court case that clarified police authority to frisk passengers during lawful traffic stops when officers reasonably suspect they are armed and dangerous.
• D. Arizona v. United States
  Arizona v. United States is a 2012 U.S. Supreme Court case that limited state authority over immigration enforcement by affirming broad federal power in this area.
• E. Illinois v. Caballes
  Illinois v. Caballes is a 2005 U.S. Supreme Court case holding that a dog sniff conducted during a lawful traffic stop does not violate the Fourth Amendment when it does not prolong the stop or reveal information other than the presence of contraband.
• F. None of above. chosen