If defendant had asserted his right to remain silent during his custodial interview, would he have been liable for error?

If defendant had asserted his right to remain silent in connection with his custodial interview, he might well have a claim for Doyle error. "Doyle forbids impeachment of a defendant's exculpatory trial testimony with cross-examination about his or her postarrest silence after receiving Miranda[¹⁴] warnings." (People v. Tate (2010) 49 Cal.4th 635, 691-692.) Here, however, defendant never mentioned his Miranda rights or made any such invocation, directly or implicitly. Instead, the record shows him actively responding to the detectives' questioning. On some points, he was forthcoming and expansive, on others, he chose to remain mum. According to defendant, he chose not to answer the questions about his possession of the bullets for a variety of reasons, none of which had anything to do with his Miranda rights.