failure to assert privilege (Virginia) · Go Syfert
← Virginia issues

failure to assert privilege in Virginia

5 Virginia opinions name it 2 courts 1994–2024 3 in the last five years

The cases below were cited by Virginia courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.

Followed or applied (1)

CaseFollowedCited
Minnesota v. Murphygreen
scotus · 1984 · cited in 5 Virginia opinions naming this issue, 1994–2024
2 sentences

2024As Murphy put it, “if the state, either expressly or by implication, asserts that invocation of the privilege would lead to revocation of probation, it would . . . create[] the classic penalty situation, the failure to assert the privilege would be excused, and the probationer’s answers would be deemed compelled and inadmissible in a criminal prosecution.” Id. at 435 .

2024As Murphy put it, “if the state, either expressly or by implication, asserts that invocation of the privilege would lead to revocation of probation, it would . . . create[] the classic penalty situation, the failure to assert the privilege would be excused, and the probationer’s answers would be deemed compelled and inadmissible in a criminal prosecution.” Id. at 435 .

25

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

CaseNegativeCited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Virginia. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (1)

CaseCitedYears
United States v. Phata Saechao green
ca9 · 2005
1 sentence

2024For instance, the Ninth Circuit held in United States v. Saechao, 418 F.3d 1073 (9th Cir. 2005), on which Thomas relies, that Oregon law created that “classic penalty situation” by treating a probationer’s failure to “answer[]” all questions as grounds to revoke probation.

12024–2024

Statutes the citing opinions construe

VA § Va. Code Ann. § 18.2-67.3 (4) VA § Va. Code Ann. § 17.1-413 (3) VA § Va. Code Ann. § 18.2-61 (3) VA § Va. Code Ann. § 19.2-271.6 (3) VA § Va. Code Ann. § 19.2-298.01 (3) VA § Va. Code Ann. § 19.2-306 (3) VA § Va. Code Ann. § 19.2-306.1 (3)

Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.

Where else courts name it

CT 27 (1977–2025) CA 24 (1968–2017) IL 13 (1986–2021) TN 10 (1995–2024) KS 9 (1990–2024) TX 8 (1924–2013) GA 8 (1975–2019) OH 6 (1997–2022) VA 5 (1994–2024) IN 4 (1954–2014) ID 4 (1987–2017) WI 4 (1987–2013) NY 4 (1989–2008) FL 4 (1939–2016) NJ 4 (1992–2020) DE 3 (1996–2025) WA 3 (1995–2015) KY 3 (1978–2014) IA 3 (1987–2011) PA 3 (1936–2014) MI 2 (1974–1995) OR 2 (1994–2004) CO 2 (2016–2016) AL 2 (2001–2002) MD 2 (1933–2015) MT 2 (1996–1997) ND 2 (1951–2008) MN 2 (1910–1999) SC 2 (2001–2001)

Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check