Commonwealth v. Adams, S., Aplt.
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION ANNOUNCING THE JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
Justice BAER.
We granted review to consider whether the right against self-incrimination, as protected by the United States and Pennsylvania constitutions, is implicated when a Commonwealth witness, such as an investigating detective, testifies without adverse implication that the defendant refused to answer questions prior to arrest. As previously observed in *602Commonwealth v. DiNicola, 581 Pa. 550, 866 A.2d 329, 336-337 (2005), and Commonwealth v. Whitney, 550 Pa. 618, 708 A.2d 471, 478 (1998), we reiterate that a mere reference to pre-arrest silence…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Salinas v. TexasSupreme Court of the United States · 2013
- Commonwealth v. JohnsonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2012
- United States v. Cecil L. BursonCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1991
- State v. LeachOhio Supreme Court · 2004
- Commonwealth v. RandolphSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2005
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by42 opinions
- Commonwealth v. LeanerSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2019
- Commonwealth v. McGriffSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2017
- Clark, S. & v. v. Fritz, M. & S., and Fritz, H.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 2016
- Com. v. Alexander, T.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 2019
- Com. v. Alfaro-Rodriguez, E.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 2018
37 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.