Home › Case briefs › Criminal Procedure

Griffin v. California

Supreme Court of the United States · 1965 · Criminal Procedure

Criminal ProcedureSelf-IncriminationComment on SilenceFifth AmendmentSelf-Incrimination ClauseFourteenth Amendmentprosecutorial commentdefendant silence

Facts

At petitioner's California murder trial on the issue of guilt, he did not testify. The trial court told the jury that although a defendant has a constitutional right not to testify, the jury could consider his failure to deny or explain evidence within his knowledge as tending to indicate the truth of that evidence and the probability of inferences unfavorable to him. The prosecutor repeatedly emphasized that petitioner would know key facts about the victim's condition, movements, and injuries, and argued that he had not taken the stand to deny or explain them. Petitioner was convicted and sentenced to death.

Issue

Does the Fifth Amendment, made applicable to the States by the Fourteenth Amendment, prohibit a prosecutor from commenting on a defendant's failure to testify and prohibit a trial court from instructing the jury that the defendant's silence may be treated as evidence of guilt?

Rule

The Fifth Amendment, in its direct application to the federal government and through the Fourteenth Amendment to the States, forbids both prosecutorial comment on the accused's silence and jury instructions by the court that such silence is evidence of guilt.

🔒

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

Free sample · practice this case

Test yourself

One of 10 multiple-choice questions for this case. Pick an answer to see why.

In a state burglary trial in Cleveland, Omar Bennett chose not to testify during the guilt phase. During closing argument, the prosecutor told the jury, "Only Omar could tell you why his fingerprints were on the bedroom window, and he did not take the stand to deny it."

If Omar is convicted, what is the strongest constitutional argument for reversal under the governing rule?

Explanation. The Fifth Amendment, applied to the States through the Fourteenth Amendment, forbids prosecutorial comment on the accused's failure to testify. The majority treated such comment as the equivalent of offering the defendant's silence as evidence against him, making the exercise of the privilege costly.