Skip to main content

Peters v. State

Citations

  • 959 N.E.2d 347
  • 2011 Ind. App. LEXIS 1971
  • 2011 WL 6849651

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

  • holding that the challenged testimony of the defendant’s silence was harmless in part because the evidence of the defendant’s guilt was strong, the references were brief, and the prosecution did not emphasize the defendant’s silence in closing arguments
  • stating that a conviction may rest on circumstantial evidence alone
  • “[P]ost-arrest, pre- Miranda silence cannot be used as substantive evidence in the State’s case-in- chief.”
  • “[P]ost-arrest, pre-Miranda silence cannot be used as substantive evidence in the State’s case-in-chief.”
  • circumstantial evidence established that defendant illegally possessed a firearm

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: May

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

17 cases in this archive cite this case.

Other cases with this name

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.