181544P.pdf   08/14/2019  United States  v.  Preston Pope
   U.S. Court of Appeals Case No:  18-1544
   U.S. District Court for the District of Nebraska - Omaha   
   [PUBLISHED] [Colloton, Author, with Melloy and Shepherd, Circuit Judges 
   Criminal case - Criminal law. Defenant's assertion that a prospective 
   juror's comments rendered the entire venire biased against him was too 
   speculative to warrant a new trial, and the district court did not abuse 
   its discretion by denying his motion for a mistrial; defendant's claim 
   that an officer's remark regarding his silence after his arrest violated 
   his rights would be reviewed for plain error in the absence of any 
   objection at trial; it is not clear that the officer's non-responsive 
   answer, stating that defendant refused to speak with police at the scene 
   of the arrest, violated the Due Process clause as the government made no 
   use of the statement to prove any fact in issue and did not refer to the 
   statement in closing; second, any violation of Doyle v. Ohio, 426 U.S. 610 
   (1976) did not prejudice defendant as the evidence of guilt was strong, 
   and he cannot demonstrative a reasonable probability that the officer's 
   passing comment about his refusal to speak affected his substantial 
   rights.