Opinion ID: 2622118
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: Comments on right to silence

Text: [¶14] Lessard points to excerpts from the testimony of two prosecution witnesses, SG and Detective Gesell, and a transcript of his post-arrest statement to Detective Gesell that was introduced at trial, and asserts that they constituted improper comments on his constitutional right to remain silent. Lessard did not object to the alleged improper comments at trial. Therefore, we must review his claim under the plain error standard, which requires Lessard to show in the record an error that transgressed a clear and unequivocal rule of law resulting in material prejudice to a substantial right. Abeyta v. State, 2003 WY 136, ¶ 10, 78 P.3d 664, 667 (Wyo. 2003); Spinner v. State, 2003 WY 106, ¶ 13, 75 P.3d 1016, 1019 (Wyo. 2003). [¶15] Art. 1, § 11 of the Wyoming Constitution provides that [n]o person shall be compelled to testify against himself in any criminal case. In Tortolito v. State, 901 P.2d 387, 390 (Wyo. 1995), we held that an individual's constitutional right to silence exists at all times  before arrest, at arrest, and after arrest; before a Miranda warning and after it  and is self-executing. We also held that a prosecutor's failure to respect the constitutional right of the defendant not to have his silence called to the attention of the jury will result in reversal of the defendant's conviction. Id. A comment on a defendant's exercise of his right to silence occurs when the prosecutor uses the silence to the state's advantage either as substantive evidence of guilt or to suggest to the jury that the silence was an admission of guilt. Lancaster v. State, 2002 WY 45, ¶¶ 39-40, 43 P.3d 80, 96-97 (Wyo. 2002); Shipman v. State, 2001 WY 11, ¶ 24, 17 P.3d 34, 39 (Wyo. 2001). [¶16] In analyzing right-to-silence claims, we consider the entire context in which the statements were made and we will not take sentences and phrases out of context. Spinner, ¶ 19, 75 P.3d at 1024 (quoting Robinson v. State, 11 P.3d 361, 373 (Wyo. 2000)). We also consider whether the prosecutor asked improper questions, whether he emphasized or followed up on the silence issue, and whether he attempted to exploit the issue in any way. Id. (quoting Lancaster, ¶ 39, 43 P.3d at 96). [¶17] Lessard first complains about the following exchange during the prosecutor's examination of SG: [Prosecutor] Were you present when they asked [Lessard] if he was willing to come down and talk with them? [SG] Yes, I was. [Prosecutor] Was he agreeable with that? [SG] No. [Prosecutor] Did he at some point agree to go? [SG] No. They asked several times if he would just come down and talk to them. [¶18] Considering this testimony in proper context, we do not find that it amounts to an improper comment of Lessard's right to silence. It appears that the prosecutor elicited this testimony to reconstruct Lessard's behavior during his initial encounter with law enforcement at SG's residence. SG's testimony drew attention only to Lessard's reluctance to leave SG alone with the deputies; it did not indicate that Lessard did not want to talk to the deputies. In fact, the jury heard testimony indicating Lessard's willingness to talk to the deputies about his whereabouts and activities that morning. At no point did the prosecutor attempt to exploit SG's testimony to imply that Lessard was unwilling to talk to the deputies. [¶19] Lessard next asserts error in the following testimony by Detective Gesell: [Prosecutor] At any time did [Lessard] make a complaint to you about his physical mobility and inability to climb in and out of a window, for example? [Gesell] No. [Prosecutor] At any time did he make any kind of physical complaint whatsoever, like my back hurts, my necks [sic] hurts, anything like that? [Gesell] No. [¶20] Obviously, the prosecutor's inquiry was not an impermissible comment on Lessard's right to silence. Lessard did not exercise his right to remain silent but, instead, chose to answer the detective's questions concerning the victims' allegations and his activities that morning. The prosecutor merely asked Detective Gesell if Lessard had mentioned back or neck problems when she informed him that he had been accused of entering SH's residence by climbing through a window. Detective Gesell's response indicated only that Lessard had not complained of such problems during the entire interview. The clear intent of the prosecutor's inquiry was to address Lessard's trial defense that back and neck problems made it impossible for him to have climbed through the window at SH's residence. In drawing attention to this omission, the prosecutor was not suggesting that the jury make the prohibited inference that Lessard remained silent because he was afraid of betraying his guilt. Rather, the prosecutor suggested only that it would have been natural for Lessard to mention that he had back problems, since they would have prevented him from committing the crime. [¶21] Lessard lastly complains about the admission of the transcript of his post-arrest statement to Detective Gesell that contained a request for counsel. We disagree that the transcribed statement constituted an improper comment on Lessard's right to remain silent. The challenged portion focused on Lessard's request to have a DNA test, which he believed would exculpate him in the crimes involving SH. In the statement, Lessard said, I want it done right now, tonight and right now I want to see an attorney. Because I want to get this done. The context of his request for counsel indicates that Lessard wanted an attorney in an attempt to force Detective Gesell to conduct a DNA test, not to protect his right to silence or hide his guilt. We find nothing in the record indicating the prosecutor used that statement for the prohibited inference of guilt from silence. [¶22] We hold that Lessard has not demonstrated a transgression of a clear and unequivocal rule of law with respect to any of the challenged evidence. The evidence did not constitute an impermissible comment on Lessard's right to remain silent. We find no plain error.