State v. Hoggins

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that in order to be inconsistent the prior statement must either contradict or materially differ from the testimony at trial
• holding that the use of a defendant’s post-arrest silence, which includes silence at the time of arrest, is improper
• noting that state courts have the power to interpret their state constitutions as more protective of individual rights that the federal constitution
• noting that appellate courts must consider the prosecutor’s comments and argument, even if not objected to, when conducting a harmless error analysis
• summarizing states’ holdings regarding the admissibility of pre-arrest silence given the limited probative value of such evidence
• finding improper comments on \post-arrest silence\ where prosecutor commented that defendant never told the police his exculpatory story when the police and the victim first confronted him in his apartment prior to his actual arrest

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).