ALBANY – The prosecution’s use of a defendant’s refusal to answer police questions violates common-law evidentiary precepts and is admissible only in extremely limited circumstances, the state Court of Appeals ruled Tuesday.
In a day dominated by decisions in criminal matters, the court also ruled Tuesday that a traffic stop by a police officer can be valid even if based on his “objectively reasonable” misunderstanding of the traffic law involved, and that errors by a double murder convict’s counsel at trial more than two decades ago warrant a new trial.
