Court Opinion

ID: 9465678
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-05 00:52:47.822355+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:39:18.629148
License: Public Domain

RONEY, Circuit Judge,
dissenting:
I respectfully dissent. In my judgment, the experienced trial judge’s instructions fully communicated to the jury the fact that it could not consider any adverse presumption against defendant because he failed to testify.
Bruno v. United States, 308 U.S. 287, 60 S.Ct. 198, 84 L.Ed.2d 257 (1939), does not require a formula of words. Justice Frankfurter there said:
We conclude that the substance of the denied request should have been granted
308 U.S. at 294, 60 S.Ct. at 201.
The trial judge specifically instructed the jury on just what evidence it could consider, telling it that its verdict had to rest on that evidence alone. He then gave the instruction quoted in Judge Thornberry’s opinion which, taken together with the rest of the charge, tells the jury that it cannot consider in any way the fact that the defendant produced no evidence, which encompasses the fact that he did not himself testify. The jury must have understood that it could draw no inference of any kind from defendant’s failure to produce evidence, including his own testimony.
The other points on appeal being without merit, I would affirm the conviction.