Case Name: The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Derrick Hill, Appellant
Court: New York Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 2014-11-18
Citations: 24 N.Y.3d 1007
Docket Number: 
Parties: The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Derrick Hill, Appellant.
Judges: Chief Judge Lippman and Judges Graffeo, Read, Smith, Pigott and Rivera concur; Judge Abdus-Salaam taking no part.
Reporter: New York Reports
Volume: 24
Pages: 1007–1008

Head Matter:
[23 NE3d 1021, 998 NYS2d 753]
The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Derrick Hill, Appellant.
Argued October 16, 2014;
decided November 18, 2014
APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL
Steven Banks, The Legal Aid Society, New York City (<Jonathan Garelick and Scott A. Rosenberg of counsel), for appellant.
Cyrus R. Vance, Jr., District Attorney, New York City (.Philip Morrow and Alan Gadlin of counsel), for respondent.

Opinion:
OPINION OF THE COURT
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 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.
Chief Judge Lippman and Judges Graffeo, Read, Smith, Pigott and Rivera concur; Judge Abdus-Salaam taking no part.
Order reversed and a new trial ordered, in a memorandum.