Court Opinion

ID: 9775143
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-29 18:45:08.984483+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:32:21.081987
License: Public Domain

CHEW, Justice,
concurring.
I fully concur in the disposition of this appeal but feel it necessary to write separately. First, I do not believe that this case involves the right to remain silent. Miller made numerous voluntary and unsolicited statements before his arrest, after his arrest, and after receiving Miranda warnings. He did not remain silent. “Doyle does not apply to cross-examination that merely inquiries into prior inconsistent statements.” Montoya v. State, 744 S.W.2d 15, 27 (Tex.Crim.App.1987). If that is the case, then the opinion unnecessarily deals with fundamental error and procedural default.
Finally, though the opinion well states the jurisprudence of the day regarding fundamental error and procedural default, I remain troubled by the degree regulation is undermining the right to remain silent which can result in jury-proof miscarriages of justice.