New Mexico Supreme Court· 3/14/1966
State v. Miller
Citations
- 412 P.2d 240
- 76 N.M. 62
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- holding that, under the Fifth Amendment, a prosecutor may not comment on a defendant's silence as evidence of guilt
- holding that the curative instruction “d[id] not sufficiently remove the impression created by the prosecutor’s comments [on defendant’s silence] from the minds of the jury, and in fact may magnify any impression”
- holding that, under the Fifth Amendment, a prosecutor may not comment on a defendant’s silence as evidence of guilt
- under federal unlawful flight statute entirely legal interstate travel only becomes criminal when combined with intent to avoid prosecution
- under federal unlawful flight statute entirely legal interstate travel only becomes criminal when combined with intent to avoid prosecution
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Chavez, Carmody, Noble, Moise, Compton
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
41 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.
- Quinn v. YoungTenth Circuit· 2015-03-13· cited 210×
- People v. SesslinCalifornia Supreme Court· 1968-04-10· cited 158×
- State v. GutierrezNew Mexico Supreme Court· 1993-10-27· cited 150×
- In Re KingCalifornia Supreme Court· 1970-10-02· cited 90×
- State v. GutierrezNew Mexico Court of Appeals· 1967-10-27· cited 64×
- State v. TorresNew Mexico Court of Appeals· 1970-01-30· cited 61×
- State v. LeybaNew Mexico Court of Appeals· 1969-03-21· cited 57×
- State v. FosterNew Mexico Court of Appeals· 1998-09-22· cited 54×
- State v. AullNew Mexico Supreme Court· 1967-10-16· cited 51×
- Layton v. StateIndiana Supreme Court· 1968-09-27· cited 51×
- State v. SneedNew Mexico Supreme Court· 1966-05-31· cited 50×
- State v. LewisNew Mexico Court of Appeals· 1969-04-18· cited 49×
- State v. LindseyNew Mexico Court of Appeals· 1969-12-05· cited 49×
- State v. HennessyNew Mexico Court of Appeals· 1992-06-23· cited 37×
- State v. AndradaNew Mexico Court of Appeals· 1971-03-26· cited 33×
- State v. FerrariNew Mexico Supreme Court· 1969-11-03· cited 30×
- State v. MontoyaNew Mexico Court of Appeals· 1968-09-12· cited 28×
- State v. HernandezNew Mexico Court of Appeals· 2016-11-28· cited 28×
- State v. GarvinNew Mexico Court of Appeals· 2005-06-21· cited 27×
- State v. GruenderNew Mexico Court of Appeals· 1971-11-05· cited 26×
Cites
18 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
- Wong Sun v. United StatesSupreme Court· 1963-01-14· cited 12,871×
- Mapp v. OhioSupreme Court· 1961-10-09· cited 9,088×
- Aguilar v. TexasSupreme Court· 1964-06-15· cited 7,289×
- Jones v. United StatesSupreme Court· 1960-03-28· cited 4,796×
- Griffin v. CaliforniaSupreme Court· 1965-04-28· cited 4,680×
- United States v. VentrescaSupreme Court· 1965-03-01· cited 4,171×
- Griffin v. CaliforniaSupreme Court· 1965-06-07· cited 4,088×
- Malloy v. HoganSupreme Court· 1964-06-15· cited 3,675×
- Giordenello v. United StatesSupreme Court· 1958-06-30· cited 1,231×
- Tehan v. United States Ex Rel. ShottSupreme Court· 1965-11-15· cited 740×
- Rugendorf v. United StatesSupreme Court· 1964-05-18· cited 725×
- Tehan v. United States ex rel. ShottSupreme Court· 1966-01-19· cited 593×
- Clayborne Bynum v. United StatesD.C. Circuit· 1959-01-20· cited 121×
- Pugach v. KleinS.D. New York· 1961-04-11· cited 75×
- Bradbury & Stamm Construction Co. v. Bureau of RevenueNew Mexico Supreme Court· 1962-06-11· cited 69×
- Rocco Salvatore Lupino v. United States of America. John Frank Azzone v. United StatesEighth Circuit· 1959-07-07· cited 23×
- Reis v. United States MarshalE.D. Pennsylvania· 1961-03-09· cited 20×
- State v. SandovalNew Mexico Supreme Court· 1955-02-02· cited 20×
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.