Is there any case law where the victim's testimony should have been suppressed as a "fruit of the poisonous tree" because she was discovered by the police through a violation of her Fifth Amendment rights?

Appellant contends that the victim's testimony should have been suppressed as a "fruit of the poisonous tree" because she was discovered by the police through a violation of his Fifth Amendment rights. Relying on Estelle v. Smith (1981) 451 U.S. 454, 101 S.Ct. 1866, 68 L.Ed.2d 359, he contends that Ruiz became an agent of the state by virtue of the statute that compelled him to report suspected child abuse and was bound to comply with the constitutional safeguards that must be observed by law enforcement officials. Because he received no Miranda warnings from Ruiz, he maintains that his Fifth Amendment rights were violated. This argument is without merit.