State v. Howell

Ohio Supreme Court

State v. Howell

211 N.E.2d 56, 4 Ohio St. 2d 11, 33 Ohio Op. 2d 43, 1965 Ohio LEXIS 408

CourtOhio Supreme Court

DecidedOctober 13, 1965

DocketNo. 38901

StatusPublished

Cited by6 cases

This text of 211 N.E.2d 56 (State v. Howell) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Ohio Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

State v. Howell, 211 N.E.2d 56, 4 Ohio St. 2d 11, 33 Ohio Op. 2d 43, 1965 Ohio LEXIS 408 (Ohio 1965).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

In Griffin, the Supreme Court of the United States held that “comment” by the trial court and by the prosecutor “on the [defendant’s] failure to testify violated the self-incrimination clause of the Fifth Amendment which we made applicable to the states by the Fourteenth,” even though such comment was authorized by the provisions of the California Constitution.

[12]*12In the instant case, the prosecutor’s brief states:

‘ ‘ The defendant did not testify at the trial. The prosecuting attorney, in closing argument, commented on the defendant’s failure to testify. The court referred to such fact in the charge to the jury.”

We are therefore required to reverse the judgment of conviction and remand the cause to the Common Pleas Court for a new trial.

Judgment reversed.

Taft, C. J., ZimmermaN, Matthias, O’Neill, Herbert, SchNeidee and BrowN, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI