WINEGARD

v.

SWENSON, WARDEN

Citator

Cited By (11 total)

• Bradley v. United States, 433 F.2d 1113 (D.C. Cir. 1969)
  …jury would naturally and necessarily take it to be a comment on the failure of the accused to testify.” Knowles v. United States, 224 F. 2d 168, 170 (10th Cir. 1955). See also Langford ,v. United States, 178 F. 2d 48, 54-55 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 339 U.S. 938, 70 S.Ct. 669, 94 L.Ed. 1355 (1948). . See text supra at notes 61, 64 and accompanying notes. . Compare Blunt v. United States, supra note 9, 131 U.S.App.D.C. at 312, 404 F. 2d at 1289. . Compare Samuels v. United States, 398 F. 2d 964, 967-969 (…
• United States ex rel. James Leak v. Follette, 418 F.2d 1266 (2d Cir. 1969)
  …rks concerning lack of contradiction are forbidden only in the exceedingly rare case where the defendant alone could possibly contradict the government’s testimony, see, e. g., Langford v. United States, 178 F. 2d 48, 55 (9 Cir. 1949), cert. denied, 339 U.S. 938, 70 S.Ct. 669, 94 L.Ed. 1355 (1950); Hunt v. United States, 231 F. 2d 784, 785 (8 Cir. 1956); Leathers v. United States, 250 F. 2d 159, 165-166 (9 Cir. 1957); Garcia v. United States, 315 F. 2d 133, 137 (5 Cir.), cert. denied, 375 U.S. 855, 84 S.Ct.…
• Sterling v. United States, 333 F.2d 443 (9th Cir. 1964)
  …witness stand and testify, and no presumption of guilt may be raised and no inference of any kind may be drawn from the failure of a defendant in this case to testify.” 4 In Langford v. United States, 178 F. 2d 48, 53 (9th Cir. 1949), cert. denied, 339 U.S. 938, 70 S.Ct. 669, 94 L.Ed. 1355 (1950), this court had occasion to consider a somewhat similar problem. In that case government counsel in his argument at one time stated, “I think it is significant that the defendant did not go on the stand and that d…