People v Hill

People v Hill 2014 NY Slip Op 07925 Decided on November 18, 2014 Court of Appeals Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law ? 431. This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports.

Decided on November 18, 2014
No. 194

[*1]The People & c., Respondent,

v

Derrick Hill, Appellant.

Jonathan Garelick, for appellant.

Philip Morrow, for respondent.

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.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Order reversed and a new trial ordered, in a memorandum. Chief Judge Lippman and Judges Graffeo, Read, Smith, Pigott and Rivera concur. Judge Abdus-Salaam took no part.

Decided November 18, 2014