CALIFORNIA EVIDENCE: CIVIL AND CRIMINAL
...Privileges
......Self-Incrimination Privilege
.........Determination of Privilege
 15 Cards On This Topic:
  • Person who holds privilege has burden to show incriminating nature of evidence.
  • 5th Amend. did not preclude DA from impeaching defense expert with evidence on which he based his opinion, including hospital records and reports of court-appointed competency experts.
  • Court need not follow Killpatrick-Kramer rule to advise self-represented D of privilege against compelled self-incrimination; this privilege alone cannot be singled out for deferential treatment.
  • Court properly refused to make co-D invoke 5th Amend. in front of jury; no inferences may be drawn from exercise of privilege.
  • Court determines availability of privilege; exercise of privilege will not be assumed.
  • As PC 1026.5(b)(7) and W&IC 1801.5 not intended to give persons subject to commitment the right not to testify, no disparate EP treatment in not affording that right to MDO committees; D’s former testimony properly admitted.
  • D's confession to friend whom police placed in cell with him was voluntary for purposes of 5th Amend. where D was unaware friend was taping conversation and element of coercion was missing.
  • To preserve claim that application of Mincey rule, re commenting on W's invocation of 5th Amend. privilege, deprived D of his constitutional rights, he had to object in trial court to application of rule.
  • D could not be questioned about matters tending to incriminate him at civil MDO hrg, but had to respond to nonincriminatory questioning about mental condition.
  • Witness failed to show that answers might incriminate him. Fear alone insufficient; must be reasonable.
  • Nonparty witness claiming privilege cannot simply refuse to answer any questions; must do so with respect to specific questions. Trial judge must inquire into each claim to see if reasonable.
  • Enhancements for admitted priors reversed as D never advised of privilege against compulsory self-incrimination and right to confront witnesses.
  • Determination, at hearing outside jury's presence, that witness will assert privilege is proper; D properly ordered to refrain from asking questions in front of jury.
  • When privilege against self-incrimination asserted in discovery, trial court may preclude D from testifying on that subject at trial.
  • General discussion of waiver of privileges.


    •