Gomez v. State

The question of whether the prosecutor, during a trial of Elias Gomez for the offense of driving while under the influence of an intoxicating beverage, made a comment upon Gomez exercise of his constitutional right of silence is the primary concern presented in this case. A secondary question is asserted which claims reversible error based upon the failure of the county court to give a cautionary instruction on the burden of proof at the time the alleged comment on the exercise of the right of - Page 54 silence occurred. On review by the district court the refusal of the county court judge to grant a mistrial and the refusal to give a cautionary instruction as contended for by Gomez both were affirmed. We find no error in the proceedings and, like the district court, we affirm.