United States v. Richard Lee Canterbury

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that “partial silence [did] not preclude [the defendant] from claiming a violation of his due process rights under Doyle”
• “By using [the defendant’s] post-arrest silence to impeach his testimony, the government attacked the heart of his defense.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).