Opinion ID: 1858107
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 27

Heading: Right to Remain Silent/Assignment of Error 4

Text: Defendant argues his due process rights were violated when the State referred to defendant as uncooperative during closing argument. Specifically, defendant argues the State used his invocation of the right to remain silent against him, in violation of Doyle v. Ohio, 426 U.S. 610, 96 S.Ct. 2240, 49 L.Ed.2d 91 (1976). This argument is meritless. Doyle prohibits the State from impeaching an accused who testifies at the guilt phase of trial with his decision to remain silent after receiving Miranda warnings during the investigation of the crime. In this case, the State was not given an opportunity to impeach defendant because he did not testify at trial. Furthermore, defendant did not remain silent after his arrest and the Miranda warning, but spoke with the police, initially denied his culpability, and subsequently confessed to the crime. The State's reference to defendant as uncooperative because he initially denied responsibility for the murders therefore does not constitute an impeachment of defendant at trial with any invocation of his right to remain silent. This argument lacks merit.