Griffin v. California
E572467
Griffin v. California is a landmark 1965 U.S. Supreme Court decision holding that prosecutors and judges may not comment on a criminal defendant’s failure to testify, as this violates the Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination.
All labels observed (2)
| Label | Occurrences |
|---|---|
| Griffin v. California canonical | 3 |
| Griffin v. State of California | 1 |
How this entity was disambiguated
This entity first appeared as the object of triple T6165812 — resolving that mention is where its identity was fixed. The disambiguator weighed these candidate entities and picked the highlighted one (or “None”, minting a new entity). This is how homonymy is resolved: the same surface form can point to different entities.
NED1
Entity disambiguation (via context triple)
gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07
Target entity: Griffin v. California Context triple: [Malloy v. Hogan, relatedCase, Griffin v. California]
-
A.
Edwards v. California
Edwards v. California is a 1941 U.S. Supreme Court case that struck down a California law restricting the bringing of indigent persons into the state, holding that such limits on interstate movement violated the Commerce Clause.
-
B.
Rochin v. California
Rochin v. California is a 1952 U.S. Supreme Court case that held evidence obtained by methods that "shock the conscience," such as forcibly pumping a suspect’s stomach, violates the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
-
C.
Bridges v. California
Bridges v. California is a 1941 U.S. Supreme Court decision that significantly expanded First Amendment protections by limiting the power of courts to punish out-of-court publications as contempt.
-
D.
Whitney v. California
Whitney v. California was a 1927 U.S. Supreme Court case that upheld a conviction under a state criminal syndicalism law and became historically significant for Justice Brandeis’s influential concurrence on free speech before later being overruled.
-
E.
Miller v. California
Miller v. California is a landmark 1973 U.S. Supreme Court decision that redefined the legal test for obscenity and allowed greater regulation of pornographic materials.
- F. None of above. chosen
- G. Unsure - the case is ambiguous/there is not enough information to decide.
NED2
Entity disambiguation (via description)
gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07
Target entity: Griffin v. California Target entity description: Griffin v. California is a landmark 1965 U.S. Supreme Court decision holding that prosecutors and judges may not comment on a criminal defendant’s failure to testify, as this violates the Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination.
-
A.
Edwards v. California
Edwards v. California is a 1941 U.S. Supreme Court case that struck down a California law restricting the bringing of indigent persons into the state, holding that such limits on interstate movement violated the Commerce Clause.
-
B.
Rochin v. California
Rochin v. California is a 1952 U.S. Supreme Court case that held evidence obtained by methods that "shock the conscience," such as forcibly pumping a suspect’s stomach, violates the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
-
C.
Bridges v. California
Bridges v. California is a 1941 U.S. Supreme Court decision that significantly expanded First Amendment protections by limiting the power of courts to punish out-of-court publications as contempt.
-
D.
Whitney v. California
Whitney v. California was a 1927 U.S. Supreme Court case that upheld a conviction under a state criminal syndicalism law and became historically significant for Justice Brandeis’s influential concurrence on free speech before later being overruled.
-
E.
Miller v. California
Miller v. California is a landmark 1973 U.S. Supreme Court decision that redefined the legal test for obscenity and allowed greater regulation of pornographic materials.
- F. None of above. chosen
Statements (45)
| Predicate | Object |
|---|---|
| instanceOf |
United States Supreme Court case
ⓘ
landmark criminal procedure case ⓘ |
| appliesTo | state criminal prosecutions ⓘ |
| areaOfLaw |
constitutional criminal procedure
ⓘ
self-incrimination ⓘ |
| argued | 1965-01-18 ⓘ |
| citation | 380 U.S. 609 ⓘ |
| constitutionalProvisionInterpreted |
Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution
ⓘ
Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution ⓘ
linked to:
Fourteenth Amendment
|
| country |
United States
ⓘ
linked to:
United States of America
|
| court | Supreme Court of the United States ⓘ |
| decided | 1965-04-28 ⓘ |
| decisionDate | 1965-04-28 ⓘ |
| dissentingOpinionBy |
John M. Harlan II
ⓘ
Potter Stewart ⓘ |
| effect |
Incorporates the Fifth Amendment protection against adverse comment on silence to the states
ⓘ
Prohibits adverse jury instructions based on defendant’s failure to testify ⓘ |
| fullCaseName |
Griffin v. State of California
ⓘ
linked to:
Griffin v. California
|
| holding |
Comment on a defendant’s silence violates the Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination as applied to the states through the Fourteenth Amendment
ⓘ
Judges may not instruct juries that they may draw adverse inferences from a defendant’s failure to testify ⓘ Prosecutors may not comment on a criminal defendant’s failure to testify at trial ⓘ |
| joinedByInMajority |
Abe Fortas
ⓘ
Arthur J. Goldberg ⓘ Byron R. White ⓘ Earl Warren ⓘ Hugo L. Black ⓘ William O. Douglas ⓘ |
| jurisdiction |
United States
ⓘ
linked to:
United States of America
|
| languageOfOpinion | English ⓘ |
| legalIssue | comment on defendant’s failure to testify ⓘ |
| majorityOpinionBy | William J. Brennan Jr. ⓘ |
| overruledOrLimitedStatePractice | California rule allowing comment on defendant’s failure to testify ⓘ |
| page | 609 ⓘ |
| party |
Edward Dean Griffin
ⓘ
State of California ⓘ
linked to:
California, United States
|
| precedentFor |
Carter v. Kentucky
ⓘ
Lakeside v. Oregon ⓘ Mitchell v. United States ⓘ |
| relatedDoctrine |
no-adverse-inference rule
ⓘ
privilege against self-incrimination ⓘ |
| reporter | United States Reports ⓘ |
| result | California conviction reversed ⓘ |
| subjectMatter | comment on defendant’s silence at trial ⓘ |
| volume | 380 ⓘ |
| yearDecided | 1965 ⓘ |
How these facts were elicited
The pipeline generated the facts above by prompting gpt-5.1 with this entity's name + description and the instruction below.
Instruction
You are a knowledge base construction expert. Given a subject entity and a description of it, return factual statements that you know for the subject as a JSON list of dictionaries(triples), where keys must be "subject", "predicate" and "object". The number of facts may be very high, between 25 to 50 or more, for very popular subjects. For less popular subjects, the number of facts can be very low, like 5 or 10. # Requirements - If you don't know the subject at all, return an empty list. - If the subject is not a named entity, return an empty list. - Include at least one triple where predicate is "instanceOf". - Do not get too wordy. - Separate several objects into multiple triples with one object.
Input
Subject: Griffin v. California Description of subject: Griffin v. California is a landmark 1965 U.S. Supreme Court decision holding that prosecutors and judges may not comment on a criminal defendant’s failure to testify, as this violates the Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination.
Referenced by (4)
Full triples — surface form annotated when it differs from this entity's canonical label.
linked to: Griffin v. California