United States v. Albert David O'Day

O’Day was convicted of having robbed a bank on February 10, 1972, and a federal savings and loan association on February 13, 1971.

Immediately prior to the commencement of O’Day’s trial, he filed a motion wherein he requested the District' Court to rule, in advance, that the prosecution would not be permitted, in the event O’Day testified in his own behalf, to inquire of O’Day as to whether he had been previously convicted of a felony. The judge reserved his ruling, and, after the prosecution had presented its case in chief, announced his decision that should the accused testify, the prosecution would be permitted to make limited inquiry of a prior felony conviction of O’Day that was not remote.

O’Day offered no testimony in his own defense, and he now urges that the court’s ruling improperly chilled him from exercising his privilege of testifying in his own behalf. We reject the argument. It appears to us that the District Court fairly and conscientiously exercised sound discretion, following the approach endorsed in Gordon v. United States, 127 U.S.App.D.C. 343 , 383 F.2d 936 (D.C.Cir.1967); Luck v. United States, 121 U.S.App.D.C. 151 , 348 F.2d 763 (D.C.Cir.1965), and some of…