During closing arguments in the Florida trial court, the prosecutor reviewed the police officer's testimony, over defense counsel's objection, arguing that Greenfield's silence after receiving Miranda warnings was evidence of his sanity.

The prosecutor suggested that respondent's repeated refusals to answer questions without first consulting an attorney "demonstrated a degree of comprehension that was inconsistent with his claim of insanity".

[2] Greenfield then unsuccessfully sought habeas corpus relief in Federal District Court, by suing the Florida Department of Corrections and its secretary, Louie L. Wainwright, arguing that the prosecutor's use of his silence violated the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment as construed in Doyle v. Ohio (1976).

[2] The court affirmed the conviction, holding that the general rule precluding a prosecutor from commenting on a defendant's exercise of his right to remain silent did not apply to a case in which an insanity plea was filed.

[2] The Court held that the prosecutor's use of respondent's post-arrest, post-Miranda warnings silence as evidence of sanity violated the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.