The state Supreme Court has taken up a case involving whether or not prosecutors may refer to a nontestifying defendant’s pre-arrest silence at trial.
The case of Commonwealth v. Adams is one of two state Superior Court rulings within the last year that have come up on opposing sides of the issue. There is no Supreme Court precedent that directly addresses the question of whether a nontestifying defendant’s pre-arrest silence may be used as substantive evidence of his or her guilt. The other Superior Court case, Commonwealth v. Molina, addresses that issue and has been appealed to the high court.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
