Opinion ID: 1325116
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 6

Heading: Comment on Armentrout's Testimony.

Text: The assistant Commonwealth's attorney stated in closing argument that Armentrout's testimony was absolutely and totally uncontradicted by anyone. Frye complains that this remark constituted an impermissible comment on his failure to testify. Where a remark is challenged as a comment on the defendant's failure to testify, the test of its propriety is whether, in the circumstances of the particular case, `the language used was manifestly intended or was of such character that the jury would naturally and necessarily take it to be a comment on the failure of the accused to testify.' Hines v. Commonwealth, 217 Va. 905, 907, 234 S.E.2d 262, 263 (1977) (citations omitted). Here, the assistant Commonwealth's attorney's comment was made in the course of his argument on the credibility of the Commonwealth's witness, Armentrout. Armentrout's credibility was the subject of conflict in the evidence, and the prosecutor could properly tell the jury, as a reason for believing his testimony, that his account was uncontradicted. See Washington v. Commonwealth, 216 Va. 185, 195, 217 S.E.2d 815, 824 (1975).