What is the current state of the law on the Miranda right to remain silent?

In Berghuis, the case relied upon by the trial court, the defendant did not say that he wanted to remain silent or that he did not want to talk with the police. "Had he made either of these simple, unambiguous statements, he would have invoked his ' "right to cut off questioning." ' [Citation.] Here he did neither, so he did not invoke his right to remain silent." (Berghuis v. Thompkins, supra, 560 U.S. at p. 382.)

"The prosecution therefore does not need to show that a waiver of Miranda rights was express. An 'implicit waiver' of the 'right to remain silent' is sufficient to admit a suspect's statement into evidence." (Berghuis v. Thompkins, supra, 560 U.S. at p. 384.)

Page 17