Legal Opinion · Dissent
State v. Arredondo
Arizona Supreme Court
Decided September 6, 1974No. 2775Published
1Dissent
CAMERON, Vice Chief Justice
(dissenting).
I regret that I must dissent.
Our statute § 13-163 A.R.S. states:
“A. A defendant in a criminal'action or proceeding shall not be compelled to be a witness against himself, but may be a witness in his own behalf. If he offers himself as a witness in his own behalf, he may be cross-examined to the same extent and subject to the same rules as any other witness.
“B. The defendant’s neglect or refusal to be a witness in his own behalf shall not in any manner prejudice him, or be used against him on the trial or proceedings.”
And we have stated:
“We must follow…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Griffin v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1965
- Griffin v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1965
- State v. AcostaArizona Supreme Court · 1966
- State v. SmithArizona Supreme Court · 1966
- State v. RhodesArizona Supreme Court · 1973
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.