Gregory Dumas was convicted of rape and child molestation after a trial involving allegations that he abused a young child over several months. On appeal from the denial of his motion for new trial, Dumas argued that counsel failed to challenge the prosecutor’s repeated questioning and closing argument about his post-arrest silence. The Court of Appeals held that the State improperly used Dumas’s silence as an inference of guilt after the defense had not opened the door to that subject. Because the evidence was not overwhelming and the prosecution repeatedly emphasized the silence, there was a reasonable probability that the constitutional error affected the jury’s credibility assessment. The court therefore held that counsel’s failure to seek a curative instruction or mistrial was deficient and prejudicial under the ineffective-assistance standard. The court did not reach Dumas’s other ineffectiveness arguments. It reversed the judgment and ordered a new trial. Two judges concurred.