The People v. Derrick Hill

New York Court of Appeals·Decided November 18, 2014·No. 194·Published

Opinion

================================================================= This memorandum is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the New York Reports. ----------------------------------------------------------------- No. 194 The People &c., Respondent,

v.

Derrick Hill, Appellant.

Jonathan Garelick, for appellant. Philip Morrow, for respondent.

MEMORANDUM:

The order of the Appellate Division should be reversed and a new trial ordered.

Absent "unusual circumstances," evidence of a defendant's silence at the time of arrest is generally

- 2 - No. 194

inadmissible under common-law evidentiary principles (People v Conyers, 52 NY2d 454, 459 [1981]). And the use for impeachment purposes of a defendant's silence after receiving Miranda warnings has been deemed impermissible as a matter of due process (see Doyle v Ohio, 426 US 610, 619 [1976]). Under the circumstances presented, we conclude that defendant did not open the door to evidence of his post-Miranda silence and, therefore, Supreme Court erred in permitting its introduction at trial. Nor can the error be viewed as harmless in this case. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Order reversed and a new trial ordered, in a memorandum. Chief Judge Lippman and Judges Graffeo, Read, Smith, Pigott and Rivera concur. Judge Abdus-Salaam took no part.

Decided November 18, 2014

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

The People v. Derrick Hill, (N.Y. 2014).

The People v. Derrick Hill (The People v. Derrick Hill) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Doyle v. Ohio
426 U.S. 610 (Supreme Court, 1976)
People v. Conyers
420 N.E.2d 933 (New York Court of Appeals, 1981)