United States v. Martin
District Court, C.D. Illinois
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
RICHARD MILLS, District Judge:
“Every criminal defendant is privileged to testify in his own defense, or to refuse to do so. But that privilege cannot be construed to include the right to commit perjury.” Harris v. New York, 401 U.S. 222, 225, 91 S.Ct. 643, 645, 28 L.Ed.2d 1 (1971).
I. BACKGROUND
In a previous Order, the Court stated that it would reserve ruling on the issue of whether the Government could use the tape recorded conversations between Defendant Michael R. Martin and Curtis Fleming for impeachment purposes until it had been determined that Defendant would testify on his own…
2Cases cited29 opinions
- Miranda v. ArizonaSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
- Edwards v. ArizonaSupreme Court of the United States · 1981
- Powell v. AlabamaSupreme Court of the United States · 1932
- Mincey v. ArizonaSupreme Court of the United States · 1978
- Colorado v. ConnellySupreme Court of the United States · 1986
24 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- State v. VentrisSupreme Court of Kansas · 2008
- United States v. QuirozDistrict Court, D. Minnesota · 1999
- Martin v. United StatesDistrict Court, C.D. Illinois · 2001
- State v. VentrisSupreme Court of Kansas · 2008
- State v. VentrisSupreme Court of Kansas · 2008