Robinson v. Commonwealth

In Robinson v. Commonwealth, 165 Va. 876, 879, 183 S.E. 254, 256 (1935), the Supreme Court of Virginia considered whether, in a perjury trial, it was error for the prosecutor to comment in closing argument on the failure of the defendant to call a witness who was present in court at the hearing when the perjury occurred and who, according to the defendant, could have corroborated his testimony. The Supreme Court held this "was a circumstance to be considered by the jury, and was the legitimate subject of comment by the Commonwealth's Attorney." Robinson, 165 Va. at 881, 183 S.E. at 256.