Opinion ID: 1908225
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Appellant's Silence as to Discovery of Drugs and Gun

Text: At trial, defense counsel did not object when the government questioned defendant as to why he did not mention to Mr. Rivera or complainant that he had found, in the attic of the house, drugs and a gun belonging to complainant's older son. The hearing court determined that the failure to object constituted ineffective assistance of counsel because the record did not support an inference that it would have been natural for defendant to disclose his findings to [complainant] or Mr. Rivera. See Hill, supra, 404 A.2d at 531 (a failure to assert a fact, when it would have been natural to assert it, amounts in effect to an assertion of the nonexistence of the fact and constitutes a prima facie inconsistency). We agree with the hearing court's finding of ineffectiveness. In any future trial of this case the hearing court's ruling regarding appellant's silence on this point should be brought to the trial court's attention so that it may consider whether the record before it, if different from the record before us, warrants a result different from that reached by the hearing court.