| Mitchell v. United States | |
|---|---|
 | |
| Argued December 9, 1998 Decided April 5, 1999 | |
| Full case name | Amanda Mitchell v. United States of America |
| Citations | 526 U.S. 314 (more) 119 S. Ct. 1307; 143 L. Ed. 2d 424; 1999 U.S. LEXIS 2348 |
| Case history | |
| Prior | Sentence affirmed, United States v. Mitchell, 122 F.3d 185 (3d Cir. 1997); certiorari granted, Mitchell v. United States, 524 U.S. 925. |
| Subsequent | Sentence vacated, remanded for resentencing, United States v. Mitchell, 187 F.3d 331 (3d Cir. 1999) |
| Holding | |
| A guilty plea does not waive the Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination at sentencing, and the sentencing court may not draw adverse inferences in determining facts related to the circumstances of the crime and bearing upon the sentence when a defendant invokes it. | |
| Court membership | |
| |
| Case opinions | |
| Majority | Kennedy, joined by Stevens, Souter, Ginsburg, Breyer |
| Dissent | Scalia, joined by Rehnquist, O'Connor, Thomas |
| Dissent | Thomas |
| Laws applied | |
| U.S. Const. amend. V; 18 U.S.C. § 846 | |
Mitchell v. United States, 526 U.S. 314 (1999), is a United States Supreme Court case that considered two Fifth Amendment privileges related to a criminal defendant’s rights against self-incrimination in a Federal District Court. The court ruled that a defendant who waives the guilty plea does not also waive the privilege during the sentencing phase of the trial, and that the court cannot draw an adverse inference from the defendant's silence when determining facts related to the crime which affect the severity of the sentence.[1]