People v Hill, 24 NY3d 1007 (2014)

2014 NY Slip Op 07925 [24 NY3d 1007]
November 18, 2014
Court of Appeals

[*1]

In the Matter of The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Derrick Hill, Appellant.

Argued October 16, 2014; decided November 18, 2014

People v Hill, 105 AD3d 472, reversed.

{**24 NY3d at 1008} OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

The order of the Appellate Division should be reversed and a new trial ordered.

[*2]
Absent “unusual circumstances,” evidence of a defendant’s silence at the time of arrest is generally inadmissible under common-law evidentiary principles (People v Conyers, 52 NY2d 454, 459 [1981]). And the use for impeachment purposes of a defendant’s silence after receiving Miranda warnings has been deemed impermissible as a matter of due process (see Doyle v Ohio, 426 US 610, 619 [1976]). Under the circumstances presented, we conclude that defendant did not open the door to evidence of his post-Miranda silence and, therefore, Supreme Court erred in permitting its introduction at trial. Nor can the error be viewed as harmless in this case.

Chief Judge Lippman and Judges Graffeo, Read, Smith, Pigott and Rivera concur; Judge Abdus-Salaam taking no part.

Order reversed and a new trial ordered, in a memorandum.