State v. Hoover

M-cCALEB, Justice (concurring).

I am not in accord with the ruling that the remarks complained of in Bill No. 13-constituted a comment upon the defendant’s, failure to testify, as the statement does not, either directly or by inference, make it plain that the Assistant District Attorney intended to -bring to the attention of the jury the fact that the defendant had not testified. See State v. Lewis, 156 La. 985, 101 So. 386 and State v. Antoine, 189 La. 619, 180 So. 465.

However, it is my opinion that the statement of the' Assistant District Attorney that, from the manner in which defendant…