Commonwealth v. Molina
33 A.3d 51
| Pa. Super. Ct. | 2011Background
- Molina appeals nunc pro tunc from judgments for third-degree murder and unlawful restraint in Allegheny County.
- Issue presented: whether the Commonwealth may use a non-testifying defendant’s pre-arrest, pre-Miranda silence as substantive evidence of guilt.
- Detective Hawthorne-Bey investigated Snodgrass’s disappearance; Molina initially denied knowledge and avoided further interview.
- During closing, the Commonwealth commented on Molina’s refusal to cooperate; defense objected but the court overruled.
- Jury convicted Molina of third-degree murder and unlawful restraint; sentencing followed, with no direct appeal filed.
- On appeal en banc, the court held that the Commonwealth cannot use a non-testifying defendant’s pre-arrest silence as substantive evidence of guilt and remanded for new trial.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| May pre-arrest silence be used as substantive evidence of guilt? | Molina argues Fifth and PA Const. protections ban such use. | Commonwealth contends no constitutional bar or waiver prevents it. | Prohibited; silence cannot be used as substantive evidence of guilt. |
Key Cases Cited
- Griffin v. California, 380 U.S. 609 (1965) (prohibits comment on a defendant's failure to testify)
- Doyle v. Ohio, 426 U.S. 610 (1976) (post-Miranda silence may not be used to impeach a defendant)
- Turner, 499 Pa. 579 (1982) (pre-Miranda silence cannot be used to impeach; Turner v. Pennsylvania)
- Jenkins v. Anderson, 447 U.S. 231 (1980) (pre-arrest silence may be used to impeach credibility when defendant testifies)
- Bolus, 545 Pa. 103 (1996) (pre-arrest silence distinguished from post-arrest context)
- Combs v. Coyle, 205 F.3d 269 (2000) (Silence use as substantive guilt evidence violates Fifth Amendment; persuasive circuit approach)
- State v. Leach, 807 N.E.2d 335 (Ohio 2004) (pre-arrest silence concerns across jurisdictions)
- Commonwealth v. Spotz, 870 A.2d 822 (2005) (post-Miranda silence prohibited for impeachment; discussion of due process)
- Commonwealth v. Lettau, 986 A.2d 114 (2009) (preservation and scope of pre-arrest silence references; distinction on waiver/testimony)
- Wainwright v. Greenfield, 474 U.S. 284 (1986) (Doyle rationale extended to mental-state context in post-Miranda setting)