Commonwealth v. SCHATVEN

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that, “[bjecause the inference, when it is made, can have a seriously adverse effect on the noncalling party ... it should be invited only in clear cases, and with caution”
• drawing such adverse inferences in criminal prosecution “may come uncomfortably close to invading constitutional rights”
• jury instructions regarding a party’s failure to call a witness “should be given ‘only in clear cases, and with caution’ ”
• ‘[circumspection ... is especially called for where the inference would run against a defendant in a criminal prosecution, for the inference may come uncomfortably close to invading constitutional righls’
• “[Circumspection ... is especially called for where the inference would run against a defendant in a criminal prosecution, for the inference may come uncomfortably close to invading constitutional rights”
• inference regarding missing witness should be invited “only in clear cases, and with caution”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).