At Carter's state criminal trial, he did not testify after a conference with counsel and the judge about the possibility that prior felony convictions could be used to impeach him if he took the stand. Defense counsel then requested a jury instruction stating that Carter was not compelled to testify and that his failure to do so could not be used as an inference of guilt or prejudice him in any way. The trial judge refused the request. In closing, the prosecutor emphasized that key evidence was "not controverted whatsoever," and Carter was convicted.
Issue
Does the Fifth Amendment, as applied to the States through the Fourteenth Amendment, require a state trial judge to give a requested jury instruction that no adverse inference may be drawn from a defendant's failure to testify?
Rule
A state trial judge has a constitutional obligation, upon a defendant's proper and timely request, to give a no-adverse-inference instruction that minimizes the danger that the jury will give evidentiary weight to the defendant's failure to testify.
🔒
See the holding & full analysis
Create a free KwikCourt account to unlock the rest of this brief — and practice the case.
The court's holding and reasoning
Doctrine tests, pitfalls & exam hypotheticals
10 practice questions + 4 AI-graded essays on this case
One of 10 multiple-choice questions for this case. Pick an answer to see why.
In a state assault trial in Columbus, Ohio, Devin Morales chose not to testify. Before closing arguments, his lawyer timely requested an instruction telling the jury that Devin had a constitutional right not to testify and that no inference of guilt could be drawn from his silence, but the judge refused.
If Devin is convicted and appeals on federal constitutional grounds, what is the strongest argument?
Explanation. The majority held that the Fifth Amendment, applied to the States through the Fourteenth Amendment, requires a trial judge to give a no-adverse-inference instruction when the defendant properly requests it. Refusal leaves jurors free to draw adverse inferences from silence and imposes an impermissible cost on the exercise of the privilege.