exercise or encourage waiver (Virginia) · Go Syfert
← Virginia issues

exercise or encourage waiver in Virginia

7 Virginia opinions name it 2 courts 1996–2010 0 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 (3)

CaseFollowedCited
United States v. Malcolm Fraziergreen
ca4 · 1992 · cited in 5 Virginia opinions naming this issue, 1996–2010
2 sentences

2010Although the Fifth Amendment provides a shield against compelled self-incrimination, “neither the text nor the spirit of the Fifth Amendment confers a privilege to lie. ‘Proper invocation of the Fifth Amendment privilege against compulsory self-incrimination allows a witness to remain silent, but not to swear falsely.’ ” Brogan v. United States, 522 U.S. 398, 404-05 , 118 S.Ct. 805, 810 , 139 L.Ed.2d 830 (1998) (quoting United States v. Apfelbaum, 445 U.S. 115, 117 , 100 S.Ct. 948, 950 , 63 L.Ed.2d 250 (1980)). “ ‘The Fifth Amendment does not insulate a defendant from all difficult choices tha

2001“The Fifth Amendment does not insulate a defendant from all ‘difficult choices’ that are presented during the course of criminal proceedings, or even from all choices that burden the exercise or encourage waiver of the Fifth Amendment’s right against self-incrimination.” See id. (citing United States v. Frazier, 971 F.2d 1076, 1080 (4th Cir. 1992)).

55
Doss v. Commonwealthgreen
vactapp · 1996 · cited in 6 Virginia opinions naming this issue, 1998–2010
2 sentences

2010Although the Fifth Amendment provides a shield against compelled self-incrimination, “neither the text nor the spirit of the Fifth Amendment confers a privilege to lie. ‘Proper invocation of the Fifth Amendment privilege against compulsory self-incrimination allows a witness to remain silent, but not to swear falsely.’ ” Brogan v. United States, 522 U.S. 398, 404-05 , 118 S.Ct. 805, 810 , 139 L.Ed.2d 830 (1998) (quoting United States v. Apfelbaum, 445 U.S. 115, 117 , 100 S.Ct. 948, 950 , 63 L.Ed.2d 250 (1980)). “ ‘The Fifth Amendment does not insulate a defendant from all difficult choices tha

2010Although the Fifth Amendment provides a shield against compelled self-incrimination, “neither the text nor the spirit of the Fifth Amendment confers a privilege to lie. ‘Proper invocation of the Fifth Amendment privilege against compulsory self-incrimination allows a witness to remain silent, but not to swear falsely.’ ” Brogan v. United States, 522 U.S. 398, 404-05 , 118 S.Ct. 805, 810 , 139 L.Ed.2d 830 (1998) (quoting United States v. Apfelbaum, 445 U.S. 115, 117 , 100 S.Ct. 948, 950 , 63 L.Ed.2d 250 (1980)). “ ‘The Fifth Amendment does not insulate a defendant from all difficult choices tha

46
Venable v. Commonwealthgreen
vactapp · 2006 · cited in 1 Virginia opinions naming this issue, 2010–2010
2 sentences

2010Further, “[t]he Fifth Amendment ... only prohibits the use of a witness’ statements which are the product of compulsion----” Husske, 252 Va. at 214 , 476 S.E.2d at 927 . “[A] witness protected by the privilege may rightfully refuse to answer unless and until he is protected at least against the use of his compelled answers and evidence derived therefrom in any subsequent criminal case in which he is a defendant,” and, “if he is nevertheless compelled to answer, *703 his answers are inadmissible against him in a later criminal prosecution.” Venable v. Commonwealth, 48 Va.App. 380, 386 , 632 S.E

2010Further, “[t]he Fifth Amendment ... only prohibits the use of a witness’ statements which are the product of compulsion----” Husske, 252 Va. at 214 , 476 S.E.2d at 927 . “[A] witness protected by the privilege may rightfully refuse to answer unless and until he is protected at least against the use of his compelled answers and evidence derived therefrom in any subsequent criminal case in which he is a defendant,” and, “if he is nevertheless compelled to answer, *703 his answers are inadmissible against him in a later criminal prosecution.” Venable v. Commonwealth, 48 Va.App. 380, 386 , 632 S.E

11

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 (7)

CaseCitedYears
Frazier v. United States neutral
scotus · 1993
2 sentences

1999But, see, Doss v. Commonwealth, 23 Va.App. 679, 687 , 479 S.E.2d 92, 96-97 (1996) ("The Fifth Amendment does not insulate a defendant from all difficult choices’ that are presented during the course of criminal proceedings, or even from all choices that burden the exercise or encourage waiver of the Fifth Amendment’s right against self-incrimination.” (quoting United States v. Frazier, 971 F.2d 1076, 1080 (4th Cir.1992), cert. denied, 506 U.S. 1071 , 113 S.Ct. 1028 , 122 L.Ed.2d 173 (1993))). 2 .

1998However, “[t]he Fifth Amendment does not insulate a defendant from all ‘difficult choices’ that are presented during the course of criminal proceedings, or even from all choices that burden the exercise or encourage waiver of the Fifth Amendment’s right against self-incrimination.” Id. at 687-88, 479 S.E.2d at 96 -97 (quoting United States v. Frazier, 971 F.2d 1076, 1080 (4th Cir.1992), cert. denied, 506 U.S. 1071 , 113 S.Ct. 1028 , 122 L.Ed.2d 173 (1993)). *300 In Doss , the sentencing judge gave the defendant a choice: he could admit his guilt and receive a suspended sentence or remain silen

31996–1999
Frazier v. United States green
scotus · 1993
2 sentences

1999But, see, Doss v. Commonwealth, 23 Va.App. 679, 687 , 479 S.E.2d 92, 96-97 (1996) ("The Fifth Amendment does not insulate a defendant from all difficult choices’ that are presented during the course of criminal proceedings, or even from all choices that burden the exercise or encourage waiver of the Fifth Amendment’s right against self-incrimination.” (quoting United States v. Frazier, 971 F.2d 1076, 1080 (4th Cir.1992), cert. denied, 506 U.S. 1071 , 113 S.Ct. 1028 , 122 L.Ed.2d 173 (1993))). 2 .

1998However, “[t]he Fifth Amendment does not insulate a defendant from all ‘difficult choices’ that are presented during the course of criminal proceedings, or even from all choices that burden the exercise or encourage waiver of the Fifth Amendment’s right against self-incrimination.” Id. at 687-88, 479 S.E.2d at 96 -97 (quoting United States v. Frazier, 971 F.2d 1076, 1080 (4th Cir.1992), cert. denied, 506 U.S. 1071 , 113 S.Ct. 1028 , 122 L.Ed.2d 173 (1993)). *300 In Doss , the sentencing judge gave the defendant a choice: he could admit his guilt and receive a suspended sentence or remain silen

31996–1999
Corbitt v. New Jersey green
scotus · 1978
2 sentences

2010Although the Fifth Amendment provides a shield against compelled self-incrimination, “neither the text nor the spirit of the Fifth Amendment confers a privilege to lie. ‘Proper invocation of the Fifth Amendment privilege against compulsory self-incrimination allows a witness to remain silent, but not to swear falsely.’ ” Brogan v. United States, 522 U.S. 398, 404-05 , 118 S.Ct. 805, 810 , 139 L.Ed.2d 830 (1998) (quoting United States v. Apfelbaum, 445 U.S. 115, 117 , 100 S.Ct. 948, 950 , 63 L.Ed.2d 250 (1980)). “ ‘The Fifth Amendment does not insulate a defendant from all difficult choices tha

2010Although the Fifth Amendment provides a shield against compelled self-incrimination, “neither the text nor the spirit of the Fifth Amendment confers a privilege to lie. ‘Proper invocation of the Fifth Amendment privilege against compulsory self-incrimination allows a witness to remain silent, but not to swear falsely.’ ” Brogan v. United States, 522 U.S. 398, 404-05 , 118 S.Ct. 805, 810 , 139 L.Ed.2d 830 (1998) (quoting United States v. Apfelbaum, 445 U.S. 115, 117 , 100 S.Ct. 948, 950 , 63 L.Ed.2d 250 (1980)). “ ‘The Fifth Amendment does not insulate a defendant from all difficult choices tha

21996–2010
Husske v. Commonwealth green
va · 1996
2 sentences

2010Further, “[t]he Fifth Amendment ... only prohibits the use of a witness’ statements which are the product of compulsion----” Husske, 252 Va. at 214 , 476 S.E.2d at 927 . “[A] witness protected by the privilege may rightfully refuse to answer unless and until he is protected at least against the use of his compelled answers and evidence derived therefrom in any subsequent criminal case in which he is a defendant,” and, “if he is nevertheless compelled to answer, *703 his answers are inadmissible against him in a later criminal prosecution.” Venable v. Commonwealth, 48 Va.App. 380, 386 , 632 S.E

2010Further, “[t]he Fifth Amendment ... only prohibits the use of a witness’ statements which are the product of compulsion----” Husske, 252 Va. at 214 , 476 S.E.2d at 927 . “[A] witness protected by the privilege may rightfully refuse to answer unless and until he is protected at least against the use of his compelled answers and evidence derived therefrom in any subsequent criminal case in which he is a defendant,” and, “if he is nevertheless compelled to answer, *703 his answers are inadmissible against him in a later criminal prosecution.” Venable v. Commonwealth, 48 Va.App. 380, 386 , 632 S.E

12010–2010
Minnesota v. Murphy green
scotus · 1984
2 sentences

2010Further, “[t]he Fifth Amendment ... only prohibits the use of a witness’ statements which are the product of compulsion----” Husske, 252 Va. at 214 , 476 S.E.2d at 927 . “[A] witness protected by the privilege may rightfully refuse to answer unless and until he is protected at least against the use of his compelled answers and evidence derived therefrom in any subsequent criminal case in which he is a defendant,” and, “if he is nevertheless compelled to answer, *703 his answers are inadmissible against him in a later criminal prosecution.” Venable v. Commonwealth, 48 Va.App. 380, 386 , 632 S.E

2010Further, “[t]he Fifth Amendment ... only prohibits the use of a witness’ statements which are the product of compulsion----” Husske, 252 Va. at 214 , 476 S.E.2d at 927 . “[A] witness protected by the privilege may rightfully refuse to answer unless and until he is protected at least against the use of his compelled answers and evidence derived therefrom in any subsequent criminal case in which he is a defendant,” and, “if he is nevertheless compelled to answer, *703 his answers are inadmissible against him in a later criminal prosecution.” Venable v. Commonwealth, 48 Va.App. 380, 386 , 632 S.E

12010–2010
Brogan v. United States green
scotus · 1998
2 sentences

2010Although the Fifth Amendment provides a shield against compelled self-incrimination, “neither the text nor the spirit of the Fifth Amendment confers a privilege to lie. ‘Proper invocation of the Fifth Amendment privilege against compulsory self-incrimination allows a witness to remain silent, but not to swear falsely.’ ” Brogan v. United States, 522 U.S. 398, 404-05 , 118 S.Ct. 805, 810 , 139 L.Ed.2d 830 (1998) (quoting United States v. Apfelbaum, 445 U.S. 115, 117 , 100 S.Ct. 948, 950 , 63 L.Ed.2d 250 (1980)). “ ‘The Fifth Amendment does not insulate a defendant from all difficult choices tha

2010Although the Fifth Amendment provides a shield against compelled self-incrimination, “neither the text nor the spirit of the Fifth Amendment confers a privilege to lie. ‘Proper invocation of the Fifth Amendment privilege against compulsory self-incrimination allows a witness to remain silent, but not to swear falsely.’ ” Brogan v. United States, 522 U.S. 398, 404-05 , 118 S.Ct. 805, 810 , 139 L.Ed.2d 830 (1998) (quoting United States v. Apfelbaum, 445 U.S. 115, 117 , 100 S.Ct. 948, 950 , 63 L.Ed.2d 250 (1980)). “ ‘The Fifth Amendment does not insulate a defendant from all difficult choices tha

12010–2010
United States v. Apfelbaum green
scotus · 1980
2 sentences

2010Although the Fifth Amendment provides a shield against compelled self-incrimination, “neither the text nor the spirit of the Fifth Amendment confers a privilege to lie. ‘Proper invocation of the Fifth Amendment privilege against compulsory self-incrimination allows a witness to remain silent, but not to swear falsely.’ ” Brogan v. United States, 522 U.S. 398, 404-05 , 118 S.Ct. 805, 810 , 139 L.Ed.2d 830 (1998) (quoting United States v. Apfelbaum, 445 U.S. 115, 117 , 100 S.Ct. 948, 950 , 63 L.Ed.2d 250 (1980)). “ ‘The Fifth Amendment does not insulate a defendant from all difficult choices tha

2010Although the Fifth Amendment provides a shield against compelled self-incrimination, “neither the text nor the spirit of the Fifth Amendment confers a privilege to lie. ‘Proper invocation of the Fifth Amendment privilege against compulsory self-incrimination allows a witness to remain silent, but not to swear falsely.’ ” Brogan v. United States, 522 U.S. 398, 404-05 , 118 S.Ct. 805, 810 , 139 L.Ed.2d 830 (1998) (quoting United States v. Apfelbaum, 445 U.S. 115, 117 , 100 S.Ct. 948, 950 , 63 L.Ed.2d 250 (1980)). “ ‘The Fifth Amendment does not insulate a defendant from all difficult choices tha

12010–2010

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check