United States v. Ramirez-Estrada, No. 12-50340 (9th Cir. 2014)
Annotate this CaseDefendant appealed his conviction for attempted entry after deportation and making a false claim of United States citizenship. The court concluded that the use of defendant's post-conviction silence to impeach him violated his rights under Doyle v. Ohio. The court concluded that a Doyle violation occurs where the prosecution uses defendant's post-invocation silence to impeach him, regardless of whether the police complied with Miranda. Accordingly, the court reversed defendant's conviction and remanded.
Court Description: Criminal Law. Reversing a conviction of attempted entry after deportation and making a false claim to United States citizenship, the panel held that use of the defendant’s post- Miranda-invocation silence to impeach him violated his constitutional rights under Doyle v. Ohio. The panel clarified that a Doyle violation occurs where the prosecution uses a defendant’s post-invocation silence to impeach the defendant regardless of whether, as here, the police complied with Miranda. The panel disagreed with the government and the district court that it was the defendant’s statements in response to routine booking questions, rather than his silence, that were used to impeach him. The panel explained that the defendant’s statements, by themselves, are not directly inconsistent with his testimony, and it is only what he omitted from his statements that was relevant to impeach him. The panel concluded that the error was not harmless, and remanded.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.