18 U.S.C. § 3481
Competency of accused
In trial of all persons charged with the commission of offenses against the United States and in all proceedings in courts martial and courts of inquiry in any State, District, Possession or Territory, the person charged shall, at his own request, be a competent witness. His failure to make such request shall not create any presumption against him.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 184
cases (3 in the last 5 years), 1949–2025 · leading case: Griffin v. California
Griffin v. California (1965)
“It is said, however, that the Wilson decision rested not on the Fifth Amendment, but on an Act of Congress, now 18 U. S. C. § 3481 . [4] That indeed is the fact, as the opinion of the Court in the Wilson case states.”
United States v. Robinson (1988)
“The United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit reversed respondent's convictions, finding that the prosecutor's comment had "deprived the defendant .”
United States v. Hasting (1983)
“[8] In my opinion it did not violate either the Fifth Amendment or 18 U. S. C. § 3481 as construed in Wilson .”
Mitchell v. United States (1999)
“Although some of these statutes (including the federal statute, 18 U. S. C. § 3481 ) contained a clause cautioning that no negative inference should be drawn from the defendant's failure to testify, disagreement with this approach was sufficiently widespread that, as late as…”
United States v. Grayson (1978)
“B Grayson's argument that judicial consideration of his conduct at trial impermissibly "chills" a defendant's statutory right, 18 U. S. C. § 3481 (1976 ed.), and perhaps a constitutional right to testify on his own behalf is without basis.”
United States v. Gainey (1965)
“[C]ounsel is forbidden by the statute [now 18 U. S. C. § 3481 ] [*] to make any comment which would create or tend to create a presumption against the defendant from his failure to testify.”
H. J. Inc. v. Northwestern Bell Telephone Co. (1989)
“933 , note preceding 18 U. S. C. § 3481 *245 (since repealed).”
Rock v. Arkansas (1987)
“30 , as amended, 18 U. S. C. § 3481 , and similar developments followed in other common-law countries.”
State v. Tomas Jaymitchell Hoyle (2023)
“30 (codified at 18 U.S.C. § 3481 )). The prosecutor made the following comments to the jury in closing argument: 6 The Supreme Court later favorably cited Justice Stevens' Hastings concurrence in Robinson, 485 U.”
Carter v. Kentucky (1981)
“30 , now 18 U. S. C. § 3481 , which states in pertinent part: "In a trial of all persons .”
Portuondo v. Agard (2000)
“30 , as amended, 18 U. S. C. §3481 ). That is a curious position for the dissent to take.”
State v. DiGuilio (1986)
“16, 1878; currently codified as 18 U.S.C. § 3481 (1986). [3] Griffin v. California, 380 U.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.