The Fourth Appellate District affirmed a judgment of conviction. The court held that the trial court did not err in instructing the jury that an accused’s selective silence in response to certain questions during post-Miranda interrogation could be construed as an adoptive admission.
A victim was robbed. He later identified Jerry Bowman as the robber. Bowman was arrested and advised of his Miranda rights. He agreed to be interrogated by a detective. Bowman answered several of the detective’s questions, but declined to answer three questions implicating him in the robbery. In response to those questions only, Bowman was silent.
