## Facts

- Todd A. Brecht, living with his sister and brother-in-law Roger Hartman (a Wisconsin district attorney), shot Hartman with a rifle.
- At trial for first-degree murder, Brecht admitted the shooting but claimed it was accidental.
- To impeach the accident claim, the prosecution referred to Brecht’s failure to report the accident before Miranda warnings and also referenced his silence after Miranda warnings.
- The jury convicted Brecht of first-degree murder, and he received a life sentence.

## Issues

1. On federal habeas review of a state conviction, what harmless-error standard applies to a due process violation from prosecutorial use of a defendant’s post-Miranda silence: Chapman’s “harmless beyond a reasonable doubt” standard or Kotteakos’s “substantial and injurious effect or influence” standard?
2. Under the correct standard, did the improper references to Brecht’s post-Miranda silence warrant habeas relief?

## Decision

- The Supreme Court affirmed the Seventh Circuit and denied habeas relief.
- The Court held that Chapman does not govern harmless-error review in federal habeas proceedings for constitutional “trial error.”
- The Court adopted Kotteakos for such review: relief is available only if the error had a “substantial and injurious effect or influence in determining the jury’s verdict.”
- The Court agreed the prosecution’s use of post-Miranda silence violated due process under Doyle v. Ohio, but concluded the error did not have the required substantial and injurious effect.
- The Court noted references to pre-Miranda silence were not barred on the same theory as Doyle because they are not induced by Miranda’s implicit assurance.

## Legal Principles

- Federal habeas review of state convictions applies a more deferential harmless-error test than direct review.
- For constitutional “trial errors” on habeas, the governing standard is whether the error had a “substantial and injurious effect or influence” on the verdict (Kotteakos), not whether the error was “harmless beyond a reasonable doubt” (Chapman).
- A Doyle violation occurs when the prosecution uses a defendant’s post-Miranda silence to impeach an exculpatory account at trial, because Miranda warnings carry an implied assurance that silence will not be penalized.
- “Trial error” is error occurring during the presentation of the case to the jury and is subject to harmless-error analysis in light of the full trial record.

## Conclusion

The Court held that federal habeas relief for a Doyle violation is unavailable unless the constitutional trial error had a substantial and injurious effect or influence on the jury’s verdict, and it found that standard unmet on this record.


Brecht v. Abrahamson, 507 U.S. 619 (1993)