Doyle v. Ohio
| Doyle v. Ohio | |
|---|---|
|
|
| Argued February 23, 1976 Decided June 17, 1976 |
|
| Full case name | Doyle v. Ohio |
| Citations | 426 U.S. 610 (more) |
| Holding | |
| The defendant's silence in response to a Miranda warning cannot be used against them. | |
| Court membership | |
|
|
| Case opinions | |
| Majority | Powell, joined by Burger, Brennan, Stewart, White, Marshall |
| Dissent | Stevens, joined by Blackmun, Rehnquist |
| Laws applied | |
| U.S. Const. amend. XIV, X | |
Doyle v. Ohio, 426 U.S. 610 (1976), is a United States Supreme Court case regarding the Due Process rights of the Fourteenth Amendment.
The Supreme Court held that the criminal defendant's silence in response to a Miranda warning cannot be used to impeach them during cross examination.
In 1980 a similar case, Jenkins v. Anderson, reached the Supreme Court, its ruling distinguishing it from Doyle. The Court ruled that the prosecution is permitted to exploit as inculpatory evidence a defendant's failure to disclose an exculpatory testimony eventually presented in trial as defense, to government officials such as police in a prompt manner before the arrest. The petitioner in this case had committed murder and, weeks later, confessed to the crime but, in the process, embroidered the narrative by claiming self-defense as the justification. The prosecution mooted this during trial as evidence of guilt and perjury. After habeus corpus relief, the Supreme Court upheld the conviction, recognizing no breach of the Fourteenth Amendment.
Salinas v. Texas (2013) expanded this ruling, ruling that mere silence during prearrest interrogations is inadequate when attempting to employ the right to silence, and instead, a suspect must unambiguously invoke the right verbally.
...
Wikipedia