State v. Moore, 366 N.C. 100

Summary

The Supreme Court of North Carolina held that admitting testimony concerning the defendant's post-Miranda exercise of his right to remain silent was error. However, because the testimony was brief and not emphasized by the prosecutor, and the evidence of guilt was substantial, the error did not constitute plain error. The court also held that testimony concerning the defendant's pre-arrest failure to elaborate during a voluntary interview was not an impermissible reference to silence, and it affirmed the Court of Appeals.

Holdings

1. Admission of testimony referring to defendant's post-Miranda exercise of his right to remain silent was error. The State generally may not introduce evidence that a defendant exercised his Fifth Amendment right to remain silent.
2. Although admission of the testimony was error, it was not plain error and did not entitle Moore to a new trial.
3. The testimony concerning Moore's failure to say anything else or elaborate during the pre-arrest conversation was not error because it described the scope of a voluntary conversation, not a refusal to speak from which an adverse inference could arise.

Questions Presented

1. Whether admission of a police officer's testimony that defendant exercised his post-Miranda right to remain silent was constitutional error.
2. Whether the unpreserved admission of that testimony constituted plain error requiring a new trial.
3. Whether the officer's testimony concerning defendant's failure to elaborate during a pre-arrest voluntary conversation referred to pre-arrest silence and was erroneously admitted.

Disposition

affirmed