In Mitchell v. United States, 526 U.S. 314 (1999), the prosecution witness testified that during one five-month period, the defendant sold 1.5 to 2 ounces of cocaine a day. Id. at 318. And that during a seventeen-month period, the defendant worked three to five times a week selling a similar amount of cocaine. Id. But on cross-examination the witness conceded he had not seen the defendant regularly during those periods. Id. Following the proceeding, the court stated it found the prosecution witness' testimony credible, id. at 319, and that one of the reasons for that finding was the defendant's "not testifying to the contrary," id. This adverse inference, according the United States Supreme Court, violated the defendant's right to remain silent because it wrongfully shifted the burden from the government to the defendant. See id. at 330 (stating that the self-incrimination privilege bars the government from enlisting the defendant's silence to satisfy its burden of proof).