From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

State ex rel Walker v. State

Supreme Court of Louisiana
Mar 19, 1999
733 So. 2d 1178 (La. 1999)

Opinion

No. 98-KH-0916

March 19, 1999

APPEAL FROM THE NINETEENTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT, PARISH OF EAST BATON ROUGE.


Writ granted in part; otherwise denied; case remanded to the district court. The district court is ordered to appoint counsel for relator and hold a hearing at which it will determine whether the state's use of his silence at a preliminary hearing to impeach the testimony he subsequently offered at trial violated the rule of Doyle v. Ohio, 426 U.S. 610, 96 S.Ct. 2240, 49 L.Ed.2d 91 (1976) and had a substantial and injurious effect on the jury's verdict. See Brecht v. Abrahamson, 507 U.S. 619, 634-38, 113 S.Ct. 1710, 1720-22, 123 L.Ed.2d 353 (1993). Trial counsel's objection on relevancy grounds adequately preserved the issue for review. See Doyle, 426 U.S. at 632, 96 S.Ct. 2251 (Stevens, J., dissenting) (defendant's silence at preliminary examination "probably attributable to [advice of] counsel" and so wholly irrelevant to defendant's credibility); see also State v. Duke, 362 So.2d 559, 561 (La. 1978); State v. Rosette, 94-1075, p. 3 (La.App. 3rd Cir. 3/22/95), 653 So.2d 80, 81. In all other respects the application is denied.


Summaries of

State ex rel Walker v. State

Supreme Court of Louisiana
Mar 19, 1999
733 So. 2d 1178 (La. 1999)
Case details for

State ex rel Walker v. State

Case Details

Full title:STATE EX REL MICHAEL WALKER v. STATE OF LOUISIANA

Court:Supreme Court of Louisiana

Date published: Mar 19, 1999

Citations

733 So. 2d 1178 (La. 1999)

Citing Cases

State v. Marcotte

We do this in part because of a recent per curiam opinion of the Louisiana Supreme Court, where it held that…

State v. Grant

However, in this matter, as shown above, defendant's attorney objected to the questioning during…