Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
6 Massachusetts opinions name it 2 courts 1996–2023 1 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Massachusetts courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Miranda v. Arizonagreen2 sentences2023See Commonwealth v. Alemany, 488 Mass. 499 , 511 (2021). "'A defendant's silence after the police have given the warnings mandated by Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436, 467-479 (1966), may not be used against the defendant' to impeach an (2014) ("a prosecutor may argue reasonable inferences from the evidence"). 15In opening, the defense counsel contended that, based on certain facts to be introduced in evidence, such as the victim asking a friend to hand him something, the jury should ask, "Was there a gun in the car?" And in closing, the defense counsel argued that the police investigation was 2020In Doyle v. Ohio, 426 U.S. 610 (1976), the United States Supreme Court held that a defendant's silence after the police have given the warnings mandated by Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (1966), may not be used against that defendant. | 5 | 6 |
Commonwealth v. Waitegreen2 sentences2023See Commonwealth v. Alemany, 488 Mass. 499 , 511 (2021). "'A defendant's silence after the police have given the warnings mandated by Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436, 467-479 (1966), may not be used against the defendant' to impeach an (2014) ("a prosecutor may argue reasonable inferences from the evidence"). 15In opening, the defense counsel contended that, based on certain facts to be introduced in evidence, such as the victim asking a friend to hand him something, the jury should ask, "Was there a gun in the car?" And in closing, the defense counsel argued that the police investigation was 2000“A defendant’s silence after the police have given the warnings mandated by Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436, 467-479 (1966), may not be used against that defendant. . . . [T]o do so would ‘penalize’ the invocation of the right to Silence.” Commonwealth v. Waite, 422 Mass. 792, 797 (1996), citing Doyle v. Ohio, 426 U.S. 610 (1974). | 5 | 5 |
Doyle v. Ohiogreen2 sentences2020In Doyle v. Ohio, 426 U.S. 610 (1976), the United States Supreme Court held that a defendant's silence after the police have given the warnings mandated by Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (1966), may not be used against that defendant. 2000“A defendant’s silence after the police have given the warnings mandated by Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436, 467-479 (1966), may not be used against that defendant. . . . [T]o do so would ‘penalize’ the invocation of the right to Silence.” Commonwealth v. Waite, 422 Mass. 792, 797 (1996), citing Doyle v. Ohio, 426 U.S. 610 (1974). | 3 | 5 |
Commonwealth v. Guygreen1 sentence2023See Commonwealth v. Alemany, 488 Mass. 499 , 511 (2021). "'A defendant's silence after the police have given the warnings mandated by Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436, 467-479 (1966), may not be used against the defendant' to impeach an (2014) ("a prosecutor may argue reasonable inferences from the evidence"). 15In opening, the defense counsel contended that, based on certain facts to be introduced in evidence, such as the victim asking a friend to hand him something, the jury should ask, "Was there a gun in the car?" And in closing, the defense counsel argued that the police investigation was | 1 | 1 |
Commonwealth v. Persongreen1 sentence2000See Commonwealth v. Person, supra at 140 . | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Massachusetts. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.