Salinas v. Texas
Holding
When petitioner had not yet been placed in custody or received Miranda warnings, and voluntarily responded to some questions by police about a murder, the prosecution"s use of his silence in response to another question as evidence of his guilty at trial did not violate the Fifth Amendment because petitioner failed to expressly invoke his privilege not to incriminate himself in response to the officer"s question.
Judgment
Affirmed, 5-4, in an opinion by Samuel Alito on Jun 17, 2013. Justice Thomas, joined by Justice Scalia, concurred only in the judgment. Justice Breyer filed a dissenting opinion joined by Justice Ginsburg, Justice Sotomayor, and Justice Kagan.
Disclosure: Goldstein & Russell, P.C., whose attorneys work for or contribute to this blog in various capacities, is among the co-counsel to the petitioner in this case.
Holding: When petitioner had not yet been placed in custody or received Miranda warnings, and voluntarily responded to some questions by police about a murder, the prosecution”s use of his silence in response to another question as evidence of his guilty at trial did not violate the Fifth Amendment because petitioner failed to expressly invoke his privilege not to incriminate himself in response to the officer”s question.
Judgment:”Affirmed, 5-4, in an opinion by Justice Alito on June 17, 2013. Justice Thomas, joined by Justice Scalia, concurred only in the judgment. Justice Breyer filed a dissenting opinion joined by Justice Ginsburg, Justice Sotomayor, and Justice Kagan.
Recommended Citation: Salinas v. Texas, SCOTUSblog, https://www.scotusblog.com/cases/salinas-v-texas/