Hoffman v. United States
Citation and Court
341 U.S. 479 (1951), Supreme Court of the United States
Facts
William Hoffman, called before a federal grand jury, refused to answer questions about his associations and whereabouts, invoking his Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination. The district court held him in contempt, finding that the questions were innocent on their face and could not possibly incriminate him.
Issue
Whether a witness may invoke the Fifth Amendment privilege when there is a real danger that truthful answers could be used in a criminal prosecution, even if the danger is not immediately apparent from the face of the question.
Holding
A witness need not answer questions if there is a real and appreciable danger of incrimination, and courts may not compel testimony merely because the incriminating link is not obvious from the question itself.
Rule / Doctrine
The “real danger” test: the Fifth Amendment privilege applies whenever the witness reasonably apprehends that his answer could be used against him in a criminal proceeding, or could furnish a link in the chain of evidence needed to prosecute him. The privilege protects against more than direct admissions — it covers answers that would provide a “link in the chain” of incriminating evidence. The danger need not be fanciful, but it must be real and appreciable.
Significance
Hoffman v. United States is a foundational Fifth Amendment case establishing the “link in the chain” formulation of the self-incrimination privilege. It prevents courts from forcing witnesses to testify simply because the incriminatory nature of the question is not apparent on its face, giving the privilege real, practical breadth.