What is the effect of the "fruit of the poisonous tree" exclusionary rule on cell phone records?

Appellant contends that the prolonged detention violated the Fourth Amendment, rendering the cell phone information and cell tower records the fruit of the poisonous tree. (See Nardone v. United States (1939) 308 U.S. 338, 340-341 [fruit of poisonous tree exclusionary rule extends to derivative or secondary evidence tainted by the initial Fourth Amendment violation].) Appellant argues that she had to be released after the dispatcher reported that her driver's license was clear.