People v. Borgne

In this case we must decide whether defendant Michael Borgne’s constitutional rights under Doyle v Ohio, 426 US 610; 96 S Ct 2240; 49 L Ed 2d 91 *181(1976), were violated, and, if they were, what effect that has on his convictions.1 We hold that defendant’s rights under Doyle were violated when the trial court erroneously allowed the prosecution to use defendant’s post-arrest, post Miranda2 silence against him. However, we also hold that the error did not amount to plain error affecting defendant’s substantial rights; therefore, the Court of Appeals judgment is reversed and defendant’s…