Uploaded March 2025 | Updated September 2026, 3 weeks ago
Get more case briefs explained with Quimbee. Quimbee has over 42,700 case briefs (and counting) keyed to 988 casebooks ► quimbee.com/case-briefs-overview
Doe v. United States
United States Supreme Court
487 U.S. 201 (1988)
The constitution's fifth amendment provides that no person, quote, shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, unquote.
In Doe versus United States, the supreme court considered the application of this privilege against self incrimination.
John Doe was the target of a federal grand jury investigation.
Doe appeared before the grand jury in compliance with a subpoena, directing him to produce records of transactions in accounts at three named foreign banks. Doe produced some bank records and testified that he had no more. When asked about the existence or location of additional records, Doe invoked his Fifth Amendment privilege against self incrimination.
The government also subpoenaed the banks, seeking records of accounts that Doe controlled. The banks refused to comply based on their country's bank secrecy laws. The government sought to have dough sign a consent directive authorizing any bank at which he had an account to disclose all information and deliver all documents in the bank's possession or control related to such accounts.
The directive didn't identify any particular banks or accounts. The directive also noted that it was executed pursuant to a court order and, quote, shall be construed as consent, unquote, to the production of any records.
On the government's motion, the district court ordered Doe to sign the consent directive.
Doe refused, reasserting his Fifth Amendment privilege. The district court found Doe in contempt.
The fifth circuit affirmed.
The United States Supreme Court granted cert.
Want more details on this case? Get the rule of law, issues, holding and reasonings, and more case facts here: quimbee.com/cases/doe-v-united-states-487-u-s-201-1988
The Quimbee App features over 42,700 case briefs keyed to 988 casebooks. Try it free for 7 days! ► quimbee.com/case-briefs-overview
Have Questions about this Case? Submit your questions and get answers from a real attorney here: quimbee.com/cases/doe-v-united-states-487-u-s-201-1988
Did we just become best friends? Stay connected to Quimbee here:
Subscribe to our YouTube Channel ► youtube.com/subscription_center?add_user=QuimbeeDotCom
Quimbee Case Brief App ► quimbee.com/case-briefs-overview
Facebook ► facebook.com/quimbeedotcom
Twitter ► twitter.com/quimbeedotcom
#casebriefs #lawcases #casesummaries
Get more case briefs explained with Quimbee. Quimbee has over 42,700 case briefs (and counting) keyed to 988 casebooks ► quimbee.com/case-briefs-overview
Doe v. United States
United States Supreme Court
487 U.S. 201 (1988)
The constitution's fifth amendment provides that no person, quote, shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, unquote.
In Doe versus United States, the supreme court considered the application of this privilege against self incrimination.
John Doe was the target of a federal grand jury investigation.
Doe appeared before the grand jury in compliance with a subpoena, directing him to produce records of transactions in accounts at three named foreign banks. Doe produced some bank records and testified that he had no more. When asked about the existence or location of additional records, Doe invoked his Fifth Amendment privilege against self incrimination.
The government also subpoenaed the banks, seeking records of accounts that Doe controlled. The banks refused to comply based on their country's bank secrecy laws. The government sought to have dough sign a consent directive authorizing any bank at which he had an account to disclose all information and deliver all documents in the bank's possession or control related to such accounts.
The directive didn't identify any particular banks or accounts. The directive also noted that it was executed pursuant to a court order and, quote, shall be construed as consent, unquote, to the production of any records.
On the government's motion, the district court ordered Doe to sign the consent directive.
Doe refused, reasserting his Fifth Amendment privilege. The district court found Doe in contempt.
The fifth circuit affirmed.
The United States Supreme Court granted cert.
Want more details on this case? Get the rule of law, issues, holding and reasonings, and more case facts here: quimbee.com/cases/doe-v-united-states-487-u-s-201-1988
The Quimbee App features over 42,700 case briefs keyed to 988 casebooks. Try it free for 7 days! ► quimbee.com/case-briefs-overview
Have Questions about this Case? Submit your questions and get answers from a real attorney here: quimbee.com/cases/doe-v-united-states-487-u-s-201-1988
Did we just become best friends? Stay connected to Quimbee here:
Subscribe to our YouTube Channel ► youtube.com/subscription_center?add_user=QuimbeeDotCom
Quimbee Case Brief App ► quimbee.com/case-briefs-overview
Facebook ► facebook.com/quimbeedotcom
Twitter ► twitter.com/quimbeedotcom
#casebriefs #lawcases #casesummaries
