Cronin v. Commissioner of Probation
Court of Appeals for the First Circuit
1Opinion of the Court
SELYA, Circuit Judge.
In Doyle v. Ohio, 426 U.S. 610, 96 S.Ct. 2240, 49 L.Ed.2d 91 (1976), the United States Supreme Court proscribed the prosecution’s use of a defendant’s post- Miranda silence in a criminal case. See id. at 619, 96 S.Ct. 2240. This state habeas case implicates that proscription. After careful consideration, we conclude that even if the Massachusetts Appeals Court (MAC) misapplied the Doyle rule — a matter on which we take no view — any comment on the petitioner’s silence was harmless when considered in the context of the trial as a whole. Consequently, we affirm the district…
2Cases cited20 opinions
- Miranda v. ArizonaSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
- Williams v. TaylorSupreme Court of the United States · 2000
- Harrington v. RichterSupreme Court of the United States · 2011
- Kotteakos v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1946
- Brecht v. AbrahamsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1993
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by22 opinions
- Porter v. Coyne-FagueCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 2022
- Bebo v. MedeirosCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 2018
- Jenkins v. BergeronCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 2016
- Gomes v. SilvaCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 2020
- Quintanilla v. MarchilliCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 2023
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.