United States v. Robert Lee Doremus, Sr.

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
414 F.2d 252 (1969)

ELI5:

Rule of Law:

A defendant in a criminal case who voluntarily takes the witness stand in their own behalf waives the Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination and may be compelled to provide physical evidence, such as a handwriting exemplar, so long as the act is relevant and not unjustly prejudicial.

Facts:

Robert Doremus went to a federal prison where his son was an inmate.
Doremus allegedly showed a badge appearing to be that of a United States marshal.
He allegedly represented himself as a United States marshal to procure the release of his son.
Doremus allegedly signed a fictitious name on a release form to take custody of his son.
At trial, Doremus took the stand and specifically denied signing the form or impersonating a marshal.

Procedural Posture:

Robert Doremus was charged in federal district court with impersonating a U.S. marshal and aiding in the escape of a federal prisoner.
At trial, Doremus testified in his own defense.
On cross-examination and over his counsel's objection, the court ordered Doremus to provide a handwriting sample in the jury's presence.
A government handwriting expert testified that the court-ordered sample matched the signature on the prisoner release form.
The jury convicted Doremus.
Doremus (appellant) appealed his conviction to the federal court of appeals, contending that the district court committed prejudicial error in compelling the handwriting exemplar.

Premium Content

Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief

You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture

Issue:

Does compelling a defendant, who has voluntarily taken the witness stand, to provide a handwriting exemplar in front of the jury violate their constitutional rights against self-incrimination or to a fair trial?

Opinions:

Majority - Per Curiam

No. Compelling a defendant who has voluntarily testified to provide a handwriting exemplar does not violate their constitutional rights. When a defendant voluntarily takes the witness stand, they waive the protection of the privilege against self-incrimination for all inquiries pertinent to the issue on trial. Such a defendant cannot selectively answer questions that favor their case while refusing those that might indicate guilt. Furthermore, the right to a fair trial is not violated by compelling a performance in court unless that act would unjustly humiliate or degrade the defendant or is irrelevant to the case. In this instance, the handwriting exemplar was not degrading and was directly relevant to the central issue of whether Doremus signed the release form.

Analysis:

This decision reinforces the legal doctrine that the waiver of the Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination is broad and comprehensive once a defendant chooses to testify. It clarifies that this waiver extends beyond oral cross-examination to include compelled physical demonstrations or the creation of evidence in open court. The case sets a precedent that such compelled acts are permissible as long as they are relevant and not unfairly prejudicial, distinguishing them from compelled testimonial communications which are protected before a waiver occurs. This holding limits a testifying defendant's ability to control the evidence presented against them from their own person during trial.

Gunnerbot

AI-powered case assistant

Loaded: United States v. Robert Lee Doremus, Sr. (1969)

Try: "What was the holding?" or "Explain the dissent"