UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, — v. LINDA RAY GARDNER, —

How courts have described this case

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

• noting that a prosecutor’s remark that the government’s evidence was unrefuted was not an improper comment on the defendant’s failure to testify “when the comment was a logical rebuttal to the defendant’s closing argument”
• noting that a prosecutor's remark that the government's evidence was unrefuted was not an improper comment on the defendant's failure to testify \when the comment was a logical rebuttal to the defendant's closing argument\
• “It is well established that ‘the Fifth Amendment ... forbids either comment by the prosecution on the accused’s silence or instructions by the court that such silence is evidence of guilt.’ ”
• the comment must be more than possibly or probably viewed by a jury as a comment on the defendant’s right against self-incrimination; it must necessarily be understood by the jury in this way, and the court must not “lightly infer” that an ambiguous remark has its most damaging meaning

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).