Adams v. State
2011 Alas. LEXIS 96
| Alaska | 2011Background
- Adams was convicted of second‑degree sexual assault of K.S., who was intoxicated at the time; Adams testified the act was consensual.
- Prosecutor cross‑examined Adams about his refusal to speak to police before trial and argued this silence affected credibility.
- Prosecutor's closing argument tied Adams's silence to the credibility of his trial testimony and to DNA evidence.
- Mae Adams pleaded no contest to misdemeanor fourth‑degree assault and testified for Adams at trial; DNA evidence connected Adams to the act.
- Alaska Court of Appeals upheld admission of pre‑arrest silence under Rule 403 and allowed post‑arrest silence to be argued under federal standards.
- This Court held the prosecutor improperly commented on Adams's silence, violated rights under article I, section 9, and reversed for a new trial.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Prosecution comments on silence violated Alaska law? | Adams; silence violated constitutional rights | State; distinctions pre/post‑arrest ignored | Yes, comments violated and were improper |
| Pre‑arrest silence admissibility and post‑arrest silence prohibition? | Adams; pre‑arrest silence inadmissible under Rule 403 | State; some silence allowed | Pre‑arrest silence inadmissible; post‑arrest silence prohibited; both plain error |
| Plain error standard under Criminal Rule 47(b) for constitutional violations? | Adams; standard should require obvious, prejudicial error | State; appropriate standard applies | Court clarifies plain error standard and finds plain error |
Key Cases Cited
- Doyle v. Ohio, 426 U.S. 610 (U.S. 1976) (post‑arrest silence cannot be used to impeach later testimony)
- Dorman v. State, 622 P.2d 448 (Alaska 1981) (pre‑arrest silence generally inadmissible; plain error analysis)
- Gunnerud v. State, 611 P.2d 69 (Alaska 1980) (prosecutorial comment on silence; weighing prejudicial impact)
- Silvernail v. State, 777 P.2d 1169 (Alaska App. 1989) (pre‑arrest silence; Rule 403 balancing; inherent prejudice of silence)
- Burford v. State, 515 P.2d 382 (Alaska 1973) (constitutional rights apply to plain error; harmless beyond doubt standard)
- Raphael v. State, 994 P.2d 1004 (Alaska 2000) (reaffirmed Burford plain‑error framework for constitutional errors)
- Gilbert v. State, 598 P.2d 87 (Alaska 1979) (plain error must be readily apparent for constitutional claims)
- Brown v. State, 601 P.2d 221 (Alaska 1979) (constitutional violations affect substantial rights; harmless beyond doubt)
- Davis v. State, 501 P.2d 1026 (Alaska 1972) (early stance against use of silence after custodial interrogation)