Right to remain silent
Salinas v. Texas
In brief
The Supreme Court left Salinas’s Texas judgment in place; Justice Alito’s opinion said Salinas had not clearly claimed Fifth Amendment protection when asked about the shotgun.
- Where it stands
- Decided
Decided 5-4 · June 17, 2013 · Opinion by Justice Alito
- What it’s about
- Genovevo Salinas answered police questions before his arrest but stayed silent when asked whether a shotgun from his home matched shells from a murder; prosecutors later used that silence at trial.
- Who it affects
- The Texas judgment against Salinas, including his murder conviction, remained in place.
Summary: written with AI from the case record.
What it's about
The Supreme Court left the Texas judgment in place; Justice Alito and two other justices concluded Salinas had not expressly claimed the Fifth Amendment’s protection against self-incrimination.
Police asked Salinas to come to the station for photographs and to clear him as a suspect. He was free to leave, so officers did not give him warnings about his rights during questioning.
The dispute centered on protection for silence during police questioning before arrest or warnings about a person’s rights.
Question presented
Does the Fifth Amendment's Self-Incrimination Clause protects a defendant's refusal to answer questions asked by law enforcement before he has been arrested or read his Miranda rights?
What the Court decided
Holding
The judgment is affirmed. 369 S. W. 3d 176, affirmed. JUSTICE ALITO, joined by THE CHIEF JUSTICE and JUSTICE KENNEDY, concluded that petitioner’s Fifth Amendment claim fails because he did not expressly invoke the privilege in response to the officer’s question. Pp. 3 − 12.
- Result
- Affirmed
The Court's reasoning
Justice Alito, with Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Kennedy, said Salinas’s claim failed because he had not clearly said he was relying on his Fifth Amendment right not to incriminate himself when asked about the shotgun. Justice Thomas, with Justice Scalia, said the claim would fail even if Salinas had done so, because the prosecutor’s comments did not force him to give self-incriminating testimony.
The vote
- Joined the judgment
- Concurred in a separate opinion
- Dissented
- Wrote an opinion
- Concurring · 2agreed with the result, wrote separately
- Thomaswrote separately
- Scalia
From the opinions
“In my view the Fifth Amendment here prohibits the prosecution from commenting on the petitioner’s silence in response to police questioning.”
What's next
The Texas judgment remains in place; the Supreme Court did not send the case back to a lower court.
Documents
Opinions
Audio
Docket activity
New analysis added
AI analysis generated: Case Briefing
New analysis added
AI analysis generated: Impact Analysis
AI analysis generated: Opinion Summary
Show 5 moreShow fewer
AI analysis generated: Decision Record
Case data updated: summary, question_presented, generation_metadata
Case data updated: question_presented, extraction_metadata
Audio Recording added: Oral Arguments - Genovevo Salinas v. Texas
Opinion added: Opinion
Sources
Primary materials plus reporting. Best-effort analysis: this explainer relies on a mix of primary materials and trusted secondary sources. Official filings and opinions remain authoritative.