In Carter v. Kentucky (1981) 450 U.S. 288, the United States Supreme Court "held that a trial judge, upon defendant's request, has a constitutional obligation to instruct the jury not to draw an adverse inference from the defendant's failure to take the stand. " (People v. Evans, 62 Cal.App.4th 186, 190 (1998).) Consequently, if a defendant so requests, the jury must be instructed in accordance with CALJIC Nos. 2.60 and 2.61 that a defendant's failure to testify cannot be used to infer guilt. CALJIC No. 2.60 reads: "A defendant in a criminal trial has a constitutional right not to be compelled to testify. You must not draw any inference from the fact that a defendant does not testify. Further, you must neither discuss this matter nor permit it to enter into your deliberations in any way." CALJIC No. 2.61 reads: "In deciding whether or not to testify, the defendant may choose to rely on the state of the evidence and upon the failure, if any, of the People to prove beyond a reasonable doubt every essential element of the charge against him her. No lack of testimony on defendant's part will make up for a failure of proof by the People so as to support a finding against him her on any such essential element." The trial judge refused to give a jury instruction explaining that defendant was not compelled to testify and that his failure to testify could not be used to infer guilt. The Kentucky Supreme Court had ruled that the requested instruction would have required the trial judge to "comment on" the defendant's failure to testify in violation of a statute prohibiting such comment. Carter, 450 U.S. at 295. The Carter court held: "The Fifth Amendment requires that a criminal trial judge must give a 'no-adverse-inference' jury instruction when requested by a defendant to do so." Carter, 450 U.S. at 300. Although the Carter court reversed the defendant's conviction as a result of the instructional error, it declined to consider whether the error was subject to harmless error analysis. (Id. at pp. 304, 305.)